Hugh Hewitt smugly tries (and fails) to make some sort of case for the Bush (hswib) War.
His cases hinges on 20/20 hindsight in positing that it would have been better to take out the Taliban in 1999 or 2000. But it simultaneously fails because the same 20/20 hindsight with regards to Iraq shows that our adventure in Iraq had no grounds except for neo-con fantasies.
His position is the basically the same bully/chicken-shit one of the current administration (hswib). This position says that we must strike preemptively because we can strike and because we are too chicken to wait for the other guy to throw the first punch. In the real world such behavior constitutes felonious assault. Self-defence it isn't. No matter how often you say otherwise.
But the righties are all a-twitter nonetheless.
But is reassuring to know that this is the best argument they may have and that it's so abysmally lame.
No comments:
Post a Comment