I'm a macho, macho Dem
August 15, 2005
News & Politics
There's no arguing with the premise that the Democrats need to provide a substantive and persuasive alternative to Bush's war, struggle, thingmibob on terrorism. But trying to out-macho the GOP is hardly the way to go:
The top Democrats in the House and Senate issued a report last month that harshly critiqued Bush administration efforts to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists. The report -- endorsed by the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate minority leader, Harry Reid -- details Iranian and North Korean steps toward building nuclear weapons, and lagging efforts to secure ''loose nukes" in Russia that could fall into the hands of terrorists.
The report calls for the United States to engage in more direct negotiations with Iran and North Korea, and for the talks to be reinforced with military pressure, including ''the possibility of repeated and unwarned strikes." [LINK]Repeated and unwarned strikes? There are times -- rare as they may be -- when Pat Buchanan makes more sense than the leadership of the Democratic Party:
And as the United States lacks the ground forces to invade Iran and topple the regime, U.S. retaliation would be restricted to air and cruise missile strikes. But just as 9-11 united Americans behind President Bush, attacks on Iran might unite the Iranian people behind the mullahs' regime, enhancing its prestige as it fought America to protect Iran's equal right to pursue nuclear power and nuclear technology, an issue upon which almost all Iranians agree.
President Bush should think long and hard before yielding to the War Party a second time. Iran is a nation three times the size of Iraq and with three times the population. This would be no cakewalk. [LINK]And this from a man who loves to make fun of "limp peaceniks."
