Does David Brooks know something we don’t about an impending war with Iran? Is he just suggesting one?
It certainly feels that way.
In his weekly analysis for PBS this Friday, David Brooks, the ideologue who argued vehemently for the urgent invasion of Iraq, laid out in sketchy prints the grounds for an attack on Iran ever so subtly. The fact that all of his arguments for the war in Iraq were discredited did not deter the self-proclaimed pure moralist in the least. Nor did it deter PBS, or the NYT for that matter, from continuously providing him with the pulpit to propagate lies necessary for his ideological agenda.
In his signature sneaky way, he suggested Iran is a rogue state that not only the neocons view as very dangerous, but also the whole Western world.
Now combine this with his claim, in that same PBS segment, of the relevancy of foreign policy in deciding presidential elections, a view he himself used not to believe in. Add to that his assertion that “somehow the middle east is going to come back in September or October next year”. Now consider the fact that Obama’s reelection prospects are looking dimmer and dimmer, and a picture starts to emerge.
I hope I am wrong but it feels like a “wag-the-dog” scenario is being promoted here.
ekwaysan
A New Line 