Sunday, October 03, 2004
Why John Kerry is a sheep in hawk's clothing
Those of us who are troubled by, or even despondent over, George W. Bush's shortcomings have been hoping for six months to see something in John Kerry that might reveal him as a genuine hawk, as opposed to a Senator from Massachussets dressed up in a hawk costume for Halloween. Joe Katzman of Winds of Change has a thoughtful post that explains that Kerry's position on Iran, spelled out in Thursday night's debate, exposes him as an appeaser on the war on terror and heir to the foreign policy tradition of Jimmy Carter.
Appeasement is a popular response to aggression because it appears to prevent war. More often than not, though, appeasement only delays war. Appeasement can make war more likely, and such wars that ultimately transpire are much more difficult than they need be because they are then fought at a time and place of the aggressor's choosing.
I even understand the impetus to look at 2 candidates who offer less than the times demand, and see the stakes before us, and tell oneself that Kerry will have to do the right thing.
But you know what? He absolutely does not.
Look at Europe now, or look back into human history - illusion and passivity in the face of real threats is an option, and some leaders and states will take it.
One question: is Kerry one of those people? Simple question. Simple answer.
Kerry's positions on issues like Iran are clear, and were openly stated in the debate: normalize relations with the world's #1 terrorist sponsors while they undermine Iraq & Afghanistan, offer them nuclear fuel [That was, indeed, a breathtaking moment. - ed.], propose sanctions the Europeans will drag their feet on in order to stop a late-stage nuclear program that's impervious to sanctions anyway, and oppose both missile defense and the nuclear bunker-buster weapons that would give the USA defensive or offensive options in a crisis.
Appeasement is a popular response to aggression because it appears to prevent war. More often than not, though, appeasement only delays war. Appeasement can make war more likely, and such wars that ultimately transpire are much more difficult than they need be because they are then fought at a time and place of the aggressor's choosing.
0 Comments:
