Intentional incoherence

Thanks to Durow for pointing me to Dick Morris' recent column:

Of course the United States needs to have China at the table to pressure Kim Jong Il. How else are we going to get the North Koreans to give away their nuclear weapons and stop building more?

Obviously a president can't ask our troops to suffer and die for a war he calls a mistake and "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Clearly our allies will be roiled by a president who calls them a coalition of the "bribed and the coerced" and belittles their contributions even as their soldiers risk their lives.

Certainly a free Iraq would send a signal to Iran — which is the only way we can get the mullahs to abstain from nuclear-weapon development.

Plainly, we need bunker-busting nuclear weapons. Where do you think the WMDs are — in store windows?

Unquestionably, we need a missile defense. Why do you think North Korea is testing its missiles?

Morris points out that Kerry's arguments are obviously wrong, but Morris gets bogged down in the day-to-day campaign strategy. Morris will seldom qualify as a Cassandra for this reason.

What is significant is not the campaign strategy that surrounds those points. I will leave that to others. What is significant is the absolute devotion by one major party to a foreign policy course that is so obviously wrong.

America is fighting a war not only with one hand tied behind its back, but with one hand punching itself in the gut.