Boy, this is great news. As tensions over Iran’s mysterious capabilities and goals ratchet up, a familiar bunch soft-shoe their way into the national spotlight. Look who’s back for a bite of the war apple: the stupid neocon lobby. From your familiar torture criminals . .
The Case for Military Action in Iran
John Yoo · Dec. 28, 2011
. . the United States should not be limited by the UN Charter, which limits the use of force to self-defense or when authorized by the Security Council . . The Charter rules have never described state practice and have the effect of keeping dictators in power and preventing the United States and its allies from maintaining peace and security in the world. The United States should have the legal right to use military force when it removes dangerous threats not just to our security, but to regions and the world — and that is, I argue, exactly what is posed by the prospect of Iranian nuclear weapons.
. . to the neo-Neocons . .
Time to Attack Iran
Matthew Kroenig | ForeignAffairs.com | Jan/Feb 2012
. . But skeptics of military action fail to appreciate the true danger that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose to U.S. interests in the Middle East and beyond. And their grim forecasts assume that the cure would be worse than the disease — that is, that the consequences of a U.S. assault on Iran would be as bad as or worse than those of Iran achieving its nuclear ambitions. But that is a faulty assumption. The truth is that a military strike intended to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, if managed carefully, could spare the region and the world a very real threat and dramatically improve the long-term national security of the United States.
The sights of these ‘serious’ admonitions are so appalling they almost defy a reply (by those of us lucky enough to have survived the last ‘emergency’ with rudimentary communication skills). We just pulled out of a war that cost us thousands of our friends’ and fellow citizens’ lives 23 DAYS AGO. But here we are again with multiple ‘foreign policy experts’ calling for America to go to war in the Middle East.
And, no, they haven’t even bothered to change their tune. It’s the same: The United Nations are stupid and illegitimate. America alone sets the tone for morality and security in international affairs. Time is slipping away, and the unseen dangers are too great to ignore. And since we do everything better now than we’ve ever done it before, the costs will be minimal.
Thank gawd at least one person calls bullshit up front:
The worst case for war with Iran
Stephen M. Walt | Foreign Policy | December 21, 2011
If you’d like to read a textbook example of war-mongering disguised as “analysis,” I recommend Matthew Kroenig’s forthcoming article in Foreign Affairs, titled “Time to Attack Iran: Why a Strike Is the Least Bad Option.” It is a remarkably poor piece of advocacy, all the more surprising because Kroenig is a smart scholar who has done some good work in the past. It makes one wonder if there’s something peculiar in the D.C. water supply.
Stephen, too, has seen this:
There is a simple and time-honored formula for making the case for war, especially preventive war. First, you portray the supposed threat as dire and growing, and then try to convince people that if we don’t act now, horrible things will happen down the road. (Remember Condi Rice’s infamous warnings about Saddam’s “mushroom cloud”?) . . Second, you have to persuade readers that the costs and risks of going to war aren’t that great . . Kroenig’s piece follows this blueprint perfectly.
They’re all constructed that way. It’s as if the Middle East Socrates Group never saw their disastrously retarded and evil recommendations for Iraq as less than acceptable. For all they know, everything went fine and they’re held in high regard. For all we know, Republicans now put as much faith in them as they ever did.