I dont think those points are in conflict? I certainly read it as yet another example of centralization of power and advisors/advisees who are only interested in “yes.” I read the NSC/JSC/cabinet advise as the passive failure of directly answering what is asked, and not what is meant or needed. To wit, yes the US DoD can absolutely suppress an opfor and infrastructure. No one asked if there was a strategic outcome, and no opinion on that matter is proffered.

Edit: I know recall JCS is reported to have said something like “its bullshit” about the Israeli operational plan/end state. But subsequent discussion focused instead on “can we”, not “how” or “should.”

And the current civilian administration is doing a pretty thorough job of eliminating anyone who _would_ point out previous lessons learned around strategic outcomes, going in to conflict necessitating clear & achievable exit criteria, creeping escalation, conflating use of force with success, etc.

Theres a reason everyone talked about “adults in the room” last time and anyone inclined to those kind of thoughts, or voicing the associated opinions, is absent now. And personally Id say that amplifies culpability, nit diminishes it.