Unreal
In a post titled “Revisionism and The Iranian Non-Bomb”, Victor Davis Hanson attempts to make the case that this is bad news for the filthy Liberals.
The latest news from Iran about the supposed abandonment in 2003 of the effort to produce a Bomb — if even remotely accurate — presents somewhat of a dilemma for liberal Democrats.
Are they now to suggest that Republicans have been warmongering over a nonexistent threat for partisan purposes? But to advance that belief is also to concede that, Iran, like Libya, likely came to a conjecture around (say early spring 2003?) that it was not wise for regimes to conceal WMD programs, given the unpredictable, but lethal American military reaction.
Fantastic. Might it possibly be that the filthy Liberals say that ‘political pressure and threat of sanctions/actual sanctions were working? As it turns out they were with Iraq?’
Also, when will people lke VDH stop taking neocon credit for Libya? It’s as if Libya hadn’t been trying to get back into some sort of international mainstream since before Bush ran for president.
I appreciate that the best form of defense may occasionally be attack, but unless the rule changes to ‘the best form of defense is to look like a total dick’, perhaps VDH should wait and see if there are huge holes in the claims of Iranian nuclear weapon abandonment or at least significant slowdown. Seriously, this is supposed to be bad news for liberal Democrats? Give me a godamned break. You can dine from the back end of a bull if you want, but relabelling your meal won’t make it caviar.
Sully has the best answer. If that’s the case, then why did the administration sit on the report for a year even as they were revving up the rhetoric against the threat posed with Iran?
It seems they’re in disagreement with VDH.
Comment by Brad — 12/3/2007 @ 7:02 pm
Ah, its the neo-Con’s favorite game: Heads I Win, Tales You Lose.
That is some seriously flawed logiv there.
Comment by Jack — 12/3/2007 @ 7:25 pm