Sampler of Foolishness

This AP story has a quick roundup of some recent dopey statements from the political opposition. Let's take a few on.

But Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and Democratic presidential contender Howard Dean warned that a U.S.-led war would give license to other nations who felt they needed to pre-emptively attack.


"It might be considered as a precedent for others to try to do the same thing," Chretien said on ABC. "Where do you stop? You know, if you can do that there, why not elsewhere?"

It's pretty obvious to anyone who examines the UN's record that countries do not feel restrained by its pronouncements. France jumped on the Ivory Coast, Russia is dealing vigorously with Chechenya, China has its way with Tibet. The US bombed Serbia. The precedence of UNSC irrelevance was established long ago.

"What is to prevent China, some years down the road, from saying, 'Look what the United States did in Iraq — we're justified in going in and taking over Taiwan?'" Dean said on NBC.

I trust that's a rhetorical question, Governor. What prevents them is their own military incapability and the threat of force by Taiwan and of course the US. American attack submarines would make short work of a Chinese attempt to supply an invasion force on Taiwan.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California drew a standing ovation from the Communications Workers of America Sunday as she stated her opposition to an Iraq war at this time. Bush has alienated allies in the war on terror, she said.

"Our country has never been greater," Pelosi said. "And yet we have never been more dependent on our friends and allies to keep our country secure."

This quote and the setup can only mean that the Dear Leader thinks that we need help from France, Germany, Russia, and Belgium to secure the Republic. And as far as the law-enforcement part of the war goes, she is partly right. Germany has been very active in hunting down the "al Qaeda types," not so sure about many of the others. German opposition looks to be pretty thin compared to that of France, probably in direct proportion to the margin Herr Schroeder enjoys in the Bundestag. (Or is it the Bundesrat?) Anyway, nothing succeeds like success, and I suspect that once Saddam is deposed and the Iraqis are dancing in the streets, we'll have the friends we need. One last dopey statement to review (Jimmy Carter is also mentioned, but he's been dealt with elsewhere.)

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said war could threaten the United States by fanning anti-American sentiment

"Anti-Americanism is a threat to us," Levin said on CNN. "We've got to lead the world. We shouldn't be treating the U.N. as an obstacle, but as an opportunity to rally the world against terrorist threats and not take unilateral actions which could fuel the terrorist response against the United States."

I probably caught Carl Levin's act for the first time a couple of weeks ago. What a tool he is. "We've got to lead the world." Yes, Senator, we do. That does not mean we go along with whatever France wants. As for treating the UN as an obstacle, well, that's what they are. They are a debating society, not an opportunity to rally the world against threats. One can pretty well count on the UN not acting against threats. Unilateral actions? Bring forth the list of supportive countries. UK, Australia, Spain, Italy, Eastern Europe, Japan. There are more, but that's plenty right there. Could fuel the terrorist response. Flash message to Senator Levin: the terrorist response began at least a decade ago. We will stop the response only by hunting down the terrorists and either killing them or putting them in jail. Pulling the plug on Saddam will provide a significant net boost to that effort, even if it does inspire a few Islamists to try for their 72 virgins.