Today and yesterday a couple of statements by political gurus struck me as both repugnant and reflective of the brutal calculations that make up national politics. Fist Sunday morning Bill Krystol said that, if Obama is ahead, Bush is more likely to invade Iran. This among other things would be an :”October surprise” of the sort that could cause major voting shifts. Krystol suggested that if McCain is ahead Bush might go from office quietly, confident that McCain would attack upon taking office.
The facile way these words tumbled off his tongue (and dribbled down his chin) shocked me. He was talking about a decision that would cost hundred of thousands, perhaps millions, of lives. A cloud of mystery remains on the question of why an attack in violation of international law is necessary. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate of course said that Iran had discontinued objectionable nuclear activity. making this talk disturbingly similar to the talk in 2003.
Today Charlie Black a very prominent adviser to McCain apologized for saying the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was an “unfortunate event” that had “helped” Mr. McCain’s presidential bid. And that a terrorist attack on U.S. soil would be a big advantage to McCain. It is probably just me but I find it unsettling to see how life is ground through political calculations.
This is not a Republican methodology; it’s a bipartisan approach.