Present anyone this list and see if they can disagree. Stay on this course?
The comments are illuminating as well.
The most interesting thing about this post is it is on one of the most respected warhawk warblogging sites. Update: a followup post urges supporting our troops by electing a Democratic Congress. When the hawks come out for a Democratic Congress Bush is terribly wrong for the country.
Nearly all the intelligent people, even the hawks on national security, have had it with the Republican Party leadership and the Bush administration. From John Holbo:
The moral progress of the spectacularly ill-named Diogenes, through the thread, is worthy of special attention. He is the first commenter, leaping in with a brash accusation of partisan bias. When it is pointed out this thing he calls "a subsidiary of moveon.org" is a catalogue of facts, he fires back, guns blazing in all manner of directions. Gradually he is reduced to mounting a narrow but determined point defense: we need to be roughing up some terrorists. He's shining a lantern beam of, like, moral darkness, in the dead of factual night, looking for a bad man. Or, to put it a bit less unkindly, he is bound and determined to find some way to be bloody-mindeder than thou. The last stand of the moral clarity brigade. The fact that Diogenes in effect sidetracks serious discussion of Iraq and national security issues by loudly making the case for torture is a hideous illustration of just how wrong the frame of the national debate is, at the momentLink from Brad DeLong. I am reading and hearing a lot more of the Bush defenders being reduced to blantant anti-Muslim attacks and support of torture. Probably for this reason.
Tags: national security, Bush, warhawks,
Post a Comment