Unless you'd like to get into the behavior of this administration with regard to politicizing each and every ginned up "controversy" independent of the seriousness of the topic. We should not be surprised, however. John Dilulio, the first Bush appointee to jump ship, way back in 2001, told us that this was the way it was going to be:
Filling the vacuum created by a lack of interest in domestic policy, says DiIulio, was an obsession with political tactics and positioning. "This gave rise to what you might call Mayberry Machiavellis -- staff, senior and junior, who consistently talked and acted as if the height of political sophistications consisted in reducing every issue to it simplest, black-and-white terms for public consumption, then steering legislative initiatives or policy proposals as far right as possible.
Combine that with a policy bias that seeks the absolute lowest common denominator in terms of foreign policy, and you get a puerile approach to the complexities of the international stage as a whole. To take the approach that "we don't do nuance" is one thing, but to offer this as a response to the recent Iranian seizure of British soldiers is another:
In the first few days after the captives were seized and British diplomats were getting no news from Tehran on their whereabouts, Pentagon officials asked their British counterparts: what do you want us to do? They offered a series of military options, a list which remains top secret given the mounting risk of war between the US and Iran. But one of the options was for US combat aircraft to mount aggressive patrols over Iranian Revolutionary Guard bases in Iran, to underline the seriousness of the situation.
If all you've got is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail....
thankfully, the adults ignored the offer:
The British declined the offer and said the US could calm the situation by staying out of it. London also asked the US to tone down military exercises that were already under way in the Gulf.
No comments:
Post a Comment