War on tyrants. The next move?posted by Jazz at 2/10/2005 03:23:00 PM
NOTE: YOU ARE VIEWING AN ARCHIVED POST AT RUNNING SCARED'S OLD BLOG. PLEASE VISIT THE NEW BLOG HERE.
Look again at his State of the Union address, where he made the War on Tyrants his central theme and organizing principle. "America," he declared, "will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world."
Too many political observers have dismissed this as little more than hot air and hypocrisy. With failure looming in Iraq and our military stretched to the breaking point, why would Mr. Bush seek new conquests. It hardly seems realistic.
But that is precisely the point. Mr. Bush operates on Christian faith and Neo-Con ideology, not on a rational weighing of our vital national interests against the resources available to secure them. Mr. Bush shuns such reality-based thinking and has banished foreign policy realists like his father's National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft from even peripheral posts in his second administration.
Sometimes you need a plain spoken person to come out and say what most of the MSM are too meek to proclaim. Weissman spends some time prognosticating about what our next moves will be in Iraq, (a long term base of operations for decades to come) but then moves on to how Bush has Iran in his sights.
Today, said the president in his State of the Union, Iran remains the world's primary state sponsor of terror - pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of the freedom they seek and deserve.
The Ayatollahs are clearly Mr. Bush's tyrants of choice, though not necessarily the most immediate. Staying on message as only they can, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, and even Douglas Feith, the Pentagon's resigning Neo-Con, have gone out of their way to insist that they are biding their time and using 'diplomatic tools' to deal with Iran and its nuclear program.
Think of it as foreplay. Just as Mr. Bush went to the United Nations Security Council after his Higher Father had already convinced him to use force against Saddam, he is again using diplomacy to set the stage for the glint he already has in his eye.
As in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, he is acting in extremely bad faith. But this time Congress, the media, and the American people have no excuse for getting sucked in. Fool me once, your fault. Fool me twice, mine.
I feel a lot better seeing that I'm not the only one who's been saying that since Condi's rock star tour of Europe kicked off. (See the link below for previous posts on this.) This is an excellent editorial and I encourage you to give Steve a little love and go read the whole thing.