"On The Brink"

Readers know I'm a fan of Andrew Sullivan. I've linked to him often, and he's been kind enough to return the favor every now and then. But in light of his oft-stated regrets for having trusted the Bush administration before the Iraq invasion, I simply don't understand his repeated misstatements on Iran -- inaccuracies that parrot the demagoguery and hysteria favored by those he so deeply mistrusts. Andrew's been the subject of a PIA Alert before in this space for writing, "Especially when they are on the verge of wielding nuclear weapons." He wrote the following today:

Ahmadinejad is calling upon God to bring about the coming of the Twelfth Imam ("the perfect human being promised to all by you"), who heralds the Apocalypse. He is also saying that he will "strive for his return." It is the most terrifying statement any president of any nation has made to the U.N. We have a dictator on the brink of nukes, striving to accelerate the Apocalypse. Think of the Iranian regime as a nation-as-suicide-bomber. And anything serious we can do to prevent it may only make matters worse. No wonder Ahmadinejad smiles. Paradise beckons.

Aside from the fact that calling Ahmadinejad a "dictator" is a stretch, we know that as of one year ago, the official estimate of the U.S. intelligence community was that Iran was about a decade away from developing nuclear weapons. A few weeks ago, The Washington Times reported that the Pentagon is working off an estimate of 5-8 years. So where's Andrew getting "on the brink" from?

I'm all for calling out Ahmadinejad on his hateful and dangerous rhetoric. But let's not try to appease far-right readership or bolster our "patriotism" street cred via easy but erroneous statements. Those of us who actually care about preventing Iran from developing a nuclear capability know that intelligent, honest analysis is far more likely to yield effective policy than lazy or deliberate Iraq-redux hysteria.

Is Andrew's definition of "on the brink" 5-10 years? If not, then he should clarify or retract the statements he's made on this, or wed himself to the results -- which may be worse than Iraq. I suspect significantly fewer readers will be willing to grant him an easy divorce this time around.