As usual, a must-read. He’s sharpest in pointing out how leaving Saddam in place was rapidly becoming a non-option, despite the Scowcroftian bromides (and weird last-minute attempts at deals, newly reported in the New York Times). Money quote:
This already lousy status quo was volatile and unstable. Saddam Hussein’s speeches and policies were becoming ever more demented and extreme and ever more Islamist in tone. The flag of Iraq was amended to include a verse from the Quran, and gigantic mosques began to be built in Saddam’s own name. Even if, as seems remotely possible, he was largely bluffing about weapons of mass destruction, this conclusion would destroy the view maintained by many liberals that, for all his crimes, Saddam understood the basic logic of deterrence and self-preservation. (That he was “in his box,” as the saying went.) Not only was he able to defy the United Nations, but with French and Russian collusion, he was also increasingly able to circumvent sanctions. The “box” was falling apart, and its supposed captive was becoming more toxic. As he became older and madder, there emerged the real prospect of a succession passing to either Odai or Qusai Hussein, or to both of them. Who could view that prospect with equanimity?
Er, most of the Democratic candidates.
JUDICIAL TYRANNY? New Jersey’s Superior Court (a single judge, not an appellate panel) just ruled against same-sex marriage, but subsequently urged the legislature to pass a domestic partner bill. The other post-Lawrence court decision – in Arizona – also ruled against equal marriage rights. So much for the wave of judge-imposed marriages predicted by the far right to justify their proposed Constitutional Amendment. You can read a PDF version of the full ruling here.
The Dish 