God's eye view or ground eye's view?

■"Panel Seeks to Shift Spy Money From Satellites to Agents: A report stirs a budget debate with huge stakes for companies," by Scott Shane, New York Times, 15 June 2005, p. A17.

■"Bush Aides Report 'Increasing Doubts' North Korea Will Give Up Nuclear Arms Program: Negotiators see little hope of serious talks with Pyongyang," by Steven R. Weisman, New York Times, 15 June 2005, p. A10.

The House Intelligence Committee just released a report that dared to suggest that less money should be spent on spy satellites (a huge portion of the overall community budget) and more on actual spies. Satellites are oh-so-Core, whereas spies on the ground are oh-so-Gap. You want to spot the missile silo, then fire up the satellite, but if you want to finger the rising terrorist leader, you better get down and dirty with the locals.

The emerging fight between the Leviathan's Big War crowd in the Pentagon (centered in the Air Force with it's space dreams and the Navy with its hopes to retain subs and carriers) and the SysAdmin's Small War crowd (Marines and Army, natch) is being replicated in the Intelligence Community. The bifurcation of the U.S. military is spreading to the Intell Community. Of course, the split was always there with that community, it's just coming down to bucks now that we have to choose somewhat between Leviathan and SysAdmin. Can't have it all. Can't prioritize al Qaeda and failed states AND keep China as enemy #1. You gotta choose, Mr. President. Ditto for the VP. You can't afford it all with the skyrocketing budget deficits and an aging population.

North Korea may well be our next big test, and here's my prediction: war will go much easier than expected and the nation-rebuilding much harder. To get the latter more right next time, we need more spies, not more satellites.

Guess which Democrat emerges as the voice of "reason" on this subject? Guess who defends the satellite community most vociferously. Why the nice congresswoman Jane Harman, who brags that her southern California district is "the intelligence satellite capital of the universe." Like members of Congress protecting their district's economic interests, I'm sure she's a super-whiz expert on all security matters that involve satellites. As always, they'll protest that no one wants a more efficient military than theyójust find those efficiencies in somebody else's district. Anything less would be "rash and irresponsible"

Yeah, to their chances for re-election.