Threat Definition? Hmmm…
China
Billions of people, a rapidly growing economy that will inevitably replace America in both economic and geo-political importance. One of our largest creditors, its technological theft and unfair trade practices are destroying America’s industry. A military confrontation over Taiwan is inevitable in the near future.
Unduly alarmist. Nothing is “inevitable. China’s technological theft and unfair trade practices are certainly serious issues and do cause a degree of economic harm, but can hardly be construed as “destroying American industry”. Regarding Taiwan, a military confrontation between the US and China is a definite possibility in the future, but unlikely in the near term – yet again, to use the term “inevitable” is unacceptable in a real analytic product.
Islamofascism
This mutant version of Islam combines traditional Islam, nostalgia for a long-gone age of Muslim supremacy, and Fascism. Motivated by hatred of western culture, if not stopped it will control not only the vital Middle East oil producers, but also important States such as Pakistan and Indonesia. Large minority populations of Moslems will destabilize other States (e.g., India and the EU). Even small Moslem enclaves, such as those in the US, can act as fifth columns.
Personally, I dislike the term “Islamofascism” because it smacks more of politicized sound-bites than reasoned analysis and true threat identification. This statement is vague and broad-brushed to the point of being absolutely useless in defining the threat.

However, as the article moves along, it seems like these two alarmist paragraphs were purposefully written in this manner to lend justification for what is really an op-ed – not analysis – on US paranoia, hubris, etc…

The last bit regarding Islam is grossly oversimplified and virtually meaningless. The close is similarly so. It is just so much pseudo-intellectual blather leading to a marketing of the next article.

What is needed in “threat identification” is a true threat assessment, one based on real analysis, not completely false ideas of the threat that happen to be populist fancy, poorly informed and emotional public opinion, or the catering of high-level politicians to various interest groups.

Take a look at the paper that SWJED posted in another thread over a month ago. The author in that case took a good look at what occurs when a threat is “identified” in the absence of any truly professional and disciplined threat assessment.

But more than simple threat identification, the article linked at the top of this thread seems to be a critique of the national-level decision/policy-making process. Although this damn sure has a significant impact upon threat identification, it is a separate issue entirely. A detailed study of interaction between national-level policy-makers and the threat analytic process since 9/11 (similar to the WWI/WWII studies in that outstanding volume Knowing One’s Enemies) would make for a fascinating read.