Iran's big threat

Dallas Morning News | Mark Davis:

“The taunt still rings in my ears. ‘What about North Korea? If we're going to get so adventurous in Iraq, what about North Korea?’ ... Well, now we've arrived at the brink of a threat more pressing than North Korea, creating a real honesty test for the people who made themselves feel better by offering up a hypothetical threat that they would actually favor responding to.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

North Korea is a hypothetical threat?!? A madman with nukes who threatens to destroy the South in a "sea of flames" is considered a hypothetical threat? To paraphrase Mark Davis himself, What planet is Mark Davis on?

And why is military action the only acceptable response? The United States and the West successfully fought and won the Cold War without going to war with the Soviet Union, a bigger threat than either North Korea or Iran today. A policy of containment, pursued by Democratic and Republican administrations alike, proved both effective and protective of our servicemen and women. The few cases where we did respond with military action (Bay of Pigs, Vietnam) were unmitigated disasters for us.

Containment was working in Iraq, too, as the fruitless search for WMD has proven. The war in Iraq was a war of choice, not necessity. It turned out to be a catastrophic choice. Now, Mark Davis is already beating the drums for war with Iran. And pre-emptively bashing Democrats for their predicted opposition to launching another war in the absence of grave and imminent threat to American national security. Mark Davis' partisanship is already sullying the debate before it begins in earnest.