Author James Bamford thinks a tax surcharge to fund wars and a threshold draft, one that would start snagging young Americans once a certain number of U.S. troops are engaged in fighting, are about the only things that can force an apathetic public to pay attention to what government does in the name of security policy.
In other words, Bamford thinks the current national security system is broken beyond repair; that Congress, the press, and the nation's professional security class have all failed to restrain a sharply focused political agenda which had getting U.S. troops on the ground in the Middle East as its over-arching goal. Plus Bamford wouldn't mind seeing the president answer directly for his policy path:
It would seem logical that if Bill Clinton could be subject to impeachment for an alleged deception over a minor consensual sexual affair, George W. Bush should be subject to the same treatment for launching a deadly and seemingly endless war based on lies, distortions and deceptions. If that doesn't qualify as a "high crime," I don't think anything does.
Right or wrong, that a relative mainstream insider like Bamford has come to these conclusions is significant.