Assignment 3
HLS 355
Read the assigned article (Another Intelligence Twist) and answer the eight questions of Universal Structures of Thought by Elder and Paul regarding the article.

Dr. Linda Elder and Dr. Richard Paul developed a checklist of eight questions that readers use when trying to comprehend the meaning. Elder and Paul stated that by answering these eight question a reader will be able to identify the true meaning of what the writer is trying to convey. These questions can be utilized to comprehend an essay, an article or a chapter by analyzing parts of the authors reasoning (Elder and Paul 2007, Pg. 28-29) For this essay I will analyze an article published in the Washington post on Friday. March 2nd, 2007 and titled “Another intelligence Twist”
The main purpose of this article is to show how the Bush administration used a poor reporting from the Central Intelligence Agency in North Korea’s Uranium enrichment program. These reports were based on exaggerated and misjudged intelligence, in order to justify a aggressive course of action toward an rogue regime and how because of their actions this cause an even more unstable relationship with the country.
The key questions that is addressing are: “Why did the Bush administration use exaggerating intelligence to justify an aggressive policy that resulted in disastrous results.” I think it’s also important to ask why the Bush administration reacted to poor intelligence that resulted in the relationship with a rogue regime.
The most important Information in the article is that information provided to the Bush administration reveals that North Korea secretly obtained 20 centrifuges for uranium enrichment from Pakistan and purchased other equipment needed to construct a large-scale enrichment facility. Now the “crucial test of the diplomatic process will be whether the North will reveal what it did with the centrifuges and other materials it is known to have acquired. Pyongyang's response will show whether it, like the Bush administration, is more inclined to conduct serious negotiations than it was four years ago.”
The main Inferences in this article are that the Bush administration was quick to react to faulty intelligence resulting in shattered diplomatic relations with North Korean. This in turn is a list of issues identified with the Bush administrations continued use of launching actions against poor intelligence. We saw this in 2002 with Iraq and the war on Terrorism which the Bush Administration used poor intelligence to react to Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program.
The key concepts we need to understand in this article are the Bush administrations past use of intelligence and Impulsive actions towards its diplomatic relations. Also the history and tense relationship between North Korean and The United States.
The main Assumption underlying the authors thinking is that the Bush administration receives a lot of poorly vetted intelligence from the Central Intelligence agency. Other assumptions are that the Bush administration was full of “Hard Liners” that overwhelming influence over others in the Bush Administration.
If we accept this line of reasoning completely the implications are we can consider that the Bush administration is full of hard liners that over react to faulty Intelligence and have a tendency to do this in more than one instance which has proven results of destroying diplomacy with rogue countries.
If we fail to accept this line of reasoning, the implications are that we cannot trust intelligence vetted by the Bush administration, also that information provided to the bush Administration has the possibility of being seen by members of the administrations who adheres uncompromisingly to a set of ideas or policies.
The main points of view presented in this article is that intelligence needs to be properly vetted and discussed prior to making rash decisions and prevent uncompromising members lead the diplomatic effort.

Reference
(n.d.). Retrieved July 14, 2016, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/03/01/AR2007030101507_pf.html
Elder, L. & Paul, R. (2012). The Thinker’s Guide to Analytic Thinking. Tomales, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.