Foreign Policy Blogging at OTB

I’ve just published a foreign policy-related post at Outside the Beltway:

Drumbeat to War With Iran: Take a Stand

Dispassionate analysis of the prospect of war with Iran by opinion writers makes its likelihood ever more acceptable. My view: I’m against it. Vehemently so.

15 comments… add one

  • Icepick

    I said it years ago, and I’ll say it again now. Let Iran get The Bomb. And THEN crush them by all means necessary. It will let everyone know that having nukes isn’t really a deterent to the USA kicking their asses in case of need. Thus nations can stop developing nuclear weapons.

    In fact, if we’re confident we know the location of all of Pakistan’s nukes, we don’t have to wait. Crush Pakistan instead, and the Iranians will be cowed, on the nuclear weapons front at least.

  • Icepick

    Mister, we could use a man like Barry Goldwater again!

  • Icepick

    And be careful, Dave, or Elliot Abrahams will lable you an anti-Semite.

  • Ben Wolf

    @Icepick

    Let’s just destroy Israel. They’ve already got nukes and we probably know where they are, and it sends an important message: If we’ll do this to an ally with nukes, imagine what we’ll do to you.

  • PD Shaw

    I have no opinion.

    I think I disagree with the premise that, in the words of Neil Peart, “if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.” For one thing, I don’t sense that the Administration is building up support for military action in Iran in the way the Bush Administration did several months before the invasion of Iraq. The more concerning comparison would be the military action against Libya, which by not seeking domestic support, would appear to legitimize a more limited military engagement in Iran.

    Generally, I support judicious use of preventative war and believe the President should seek Congressional support prior to any military intervention in Iran, unless time and secrecy are imperative, in which case an after-the-fact Congressional resolution would suffice. Once Congress is informed of the situation and support is asked, I will have an opinion.

  • Icepick

    Let’s just destroy Israel. They’ve already got nukes and we probably know where they are, and it sends an important message: If we’ll do this to an ally with nukes, imagine what we’ll do to you.

    Oooooo. I like this. This goes far beyond batshit crazy (my idea) and goes straight on to batshit sociopathic crazy. Me likey!

  • Icepick

    Generally, I support judicious use of preventative war ….

    Well, the judicious is the tough part, isn’t it?

    …unless time and secrecy are imperative, in which case an after-the-fact Congressional resolution would suffice.

    That’s just a recipe for even more Presidential over-reach. At the very least the President should consult leaders in Congress in such cases. Short of nuclear war I can’t see where that is a big problem. After all, we’re likely going to be moving pieces into place for some time before hand, having not adopted the High Frontiers concept.

  • I have no opinion.

    Without an opinion an opinion writer, as Mr. Ignatius is, should not write. There is an Overton window sort of issue involved. Writing, apparently dispassionately and objectively, on the subject of war with Iran normalizes the idea and extends it into the conventional wisdom as acceptable policy. It is advocacy without commitment.

  • steve

    I dont think bombing is practical. Iran has been engineering high strength concrete fro quite while. They have spread their sites out to many places, some of them near Muslim holy sites. It is unlikely we hit all of the facilities. Most of the knowledge will be retained. An invasion and long term occupation would be needed. Not very likely to work well. (See US wars, circa 2001-2012).

    Also, I see no evidence that Iran would be worse than Pakistan, N. Korea, China, etc. I dont see how they bomb Israel w/o killing tons of Muslims.

    Steve

  • Andy

    Oooooo. I like this. This goes far beyond batshit crazy (my idea) and goes straight on to batshit sociopathic crazy. Me likey!

    How about this: We nuke ourselves, thereby sending this message: If we’ll do this to ourselves with nukes, imagine what we’ll do to you.

  • We nuke ourselves, thereby sending this message

    He means it! It’s the Blazing Saddles strategy.

  • Andy

    Writing, apparently dispassionately and objectively, on the subject of war with Iran normalizes the idea and extends it into the conventional wisdom as acceptable policy

    It depends on who is doing the writing. Dispassionate analysis is exactly what the intelligence community and military is supposed to do, for example. I agree regarding op-ed writers though.

  • Andy

    I love Blazing Saddles.

  • Icepick

    The only problem with the Blazing Saddles strategy is that one’s opponents must ALL be idiots. If there is one non-idiot amongst them, you’re humped.

  • Dispassionate analysis is exactly what the intelligence community and military is supposed to do

    The difference is that they’re not writing for a popular audience and David Ignatius is.

Leave a Comment