Salivating, Or Worse, For a War

Today, this same dynamic is creating a moment of great danger. The radicals are becoming reckless, asserting themselves for little reason beyond the conviction that they can. They are very likely to overreach. It is not hard to imagine scenarios in which a single match--say a terrible terror attack from Gaza--could ignite a chain reaction. Israel could handle Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria, albeit with painful losses all around, but if Iran intervened rather than see its regional assets eliminated, could the U.S. stay out?

With the Bush administration's policies having failed to pacify Iraq, it is natural that the public has lost patience and that the opposition party is hurling brickbats. But the demands of congressional Democrats that we throw in the towel in Iraq, their attempts to constrain the president's freedom to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons program, the proposal of the Baker-Hamilton commission that we appeal to Iran to help extricate us from Iraq--all of these may be read by the radicals as signs of our imminent collapse. In the name of peace, they are hastening the advent of the next war.

--Muravchick Yet Again

Horror of horrors! The umbrella-wielding hordes are constraining "the president's freedom to destroy", and it is this constraint that threatens a war. Congress exercising its constitutional function.

Here we see Muravchick salivating, or worse, for a war; he will stop at nothing to have one. As Shakespeare said, such men are dangerous.

Where is the national interest in this fantasized folly? A question never asked, because it cannot be answered.