Bending the Third Rail
Because We Should, We Can, We Do
Monday, January 16, 2006
A New Shell Game
I haven't discussed Iran much. I'm going to have to. It's going to be the big foreign policy issue in 2006.

As we begin that discussion, Josh Marshall makes an excellent, excellent point:
The prospect of a nuclearized Iran seems far more perilous to me than anything we faced or seemed likely to face with Iraq. But for those of us trying to think through how to deal with this situation, we have to start from the premise that there is no Iran Question, or whatever you want to call it. There's only how to deal with Iran with this administration in place.

Do you trust this White House's good faith, priorities or competence in dealing with this situation?

Based on everything I've seen in almost five years the answer is pretty clearly 'no' on each count. To my thinking that has to be the starting point of the discussion.
This spoken by a centrist Democrat who openly entertained the idea of military invasion of Iraq. I think Josh, like all of us, learned a lesson.

There was a certain platform of trust and respect in government prior to this administration. Different people might have put that level of trust in different places, but I think for a majority of us, it was in a place of some confidence that our government would handle the situation with some skill. The parlor game of "what to do about Iraq" was done with that framework in mind ... namely assuming our leaders would behave responsibly. That platform, no matter what you thought of it, has been shattered by this administration. Thus, no responsible discussion of what to do about Iran can happen without taking the Bush administration, more seriously than ever, into the equation.

For some, this may seem like a given. But for most, and certainly for most of the voting public, it must be emphasized.
1 Comments:
Blogger mikevotes said...
We're not talking about Abramoff, or Iraq, or NSA spying today.

Mike