On Friday, I went to Santa Clara University to see Leon Panetta, a former Chief of Staff (under Bill Clinton) and a member of the Iraq Study Group (ISG), speak. The event was part of the university's Ethics at Noon lecture series and was held at the de Saisset Museum on campus. There were perhaps two-hundred people in attendance - a generally gray-haired crowd with a sprinkle of university students.

Over the course of an hour, Panetta touched on a number of topics - his background in ethics and government, a brief history of our democracy, the role of ethics in policy making, the ISG, highlights of the ISG Report, and the future of Iraq.

• When our government sets policies, it should always be guided by two important principles: promoting the common good and improving the lives of our children.
• In the absence of leadership, we are governed by crisis.
• If we won't use diplomacy with our enemies, then what good is diplomacy?
• If we don't keep the diplomatic channel open, then the only alternative is force.
• Talking with the enemy isn't appeasement and it isn't a sign of weakness.
• Diplomacy is less about making the other side see things our way and more about making the other side see why it's in their self-interest to see things our way.
• The ISG made recommendations it thought would best support the stated goal of U.S. foreign policy towards Iraq: a country capable of governing, sustaining, and defending itself.
• The billions of dollars of aid going to Iraq needs to be better managed so there is greater accountability to ensure it reaches the intended people and efforts.
• The ISG felt it was essential our commitment in Iraq not be open-ended and our plans not be affected by the Iraqi government's failure to fulfill its commitments.
• Panetta believed it would be up to the next president to end this war.
• He also believed war with Iran was avoidable as long as we were willing to sit down and talk with the Iranians.

Panetta didn't say anything new or mind-blowing, but I didn't expect him to deliver any shocking revelations, which may beg the question, "Then why bother to hear him speak?"

I suppose I wanted to gain a greater understanding of the report and the situation in Iraq from somebody who was part of the effort and studied the subject. I also wanted to reaffirm my belief that the report was written by intelligent and reasonable people with a solid grasp of reality. Finally, Panetta is a Santa Clara graduate (like me, just 36 years earlier) and a well-respected political figure from the area (unlike me), so I was also motivated by sense of connection and admiration.