Chilling data; they use "more than 100 of America's top foreign-policy experts." It's a little tricky for a naive reader like me to puzzle out their point of view.

Awell written and informed comprehensive look at the "War on Terror" and the impact of past and current actions. Seven pages of text and graphs covering Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East as well as potential strikes against western countries.

These Foreign Policy mini-books contain a lot of information to digest. This one talks about many questions posed to purported experts and is probably a reasonably accurate reflection of beltway professional opinion. The piece uses "public opinion" numbers which appear more supportive of governmental policy than my memory supports but I'm sure it's legitimate. The experts are much more critical than the public. It's an interesting "index" and it will be interesting to track if they keep it up.

I think it gives a more realistic view on how well we are doing to actually fight terrorism than the main publications do.

It is a shame that the general public seems more interested in the details of Nicole Smith's demise than in the evidence of experts who are trying to inform the nation about the disaster about to happen in Iran. If only the experts could use spin doctors for their press releases as does the Bush administration, perhaps the publc might take more notice of what is about to happen to our nation. But then using spin doctors rather than simply presenting truthful evidence is Machiavellian, a quality which has characterized Bush politics for his entire career and one to which experts and professionals will not stoop.