Echidne has an interesting analysis of Bill Keller’s hilariously titled article, “My Unfinished 9/11 Business: A hard look at why I wanted war.” (Get it?) She comments on his stupid evocation of manly hormones to explain his useful idiocy in supporting–against all evidence and logic–the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
I remember 2002-03. There were a lot of so-called “liberal” and even left “men” who had major hard-ons to invade Iraq. You probably can remember some of them, too: wrong blogger Joshua Marshall, wrong New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, and wrong writers Christopher Hitchens and George Packer. Wrong Kenneth Pollack–who alone among this crowd has had the decency to retreat into the background–gave the rest of the rat pack cover for their support for George W. Bush’s second war. None of them had military experience. All of them treated the invasion of a sovereign country as though it were a stoned late-night game of Risk in their parents’ basement. (Only even stoned Risk-players know never to get bogged down in an Asian land war!)
All of them were egregiously wrong, and yet they either retain their prominent perches as news analysts and opinion-makers or they’ve even been promoted. Why does anyone take them seriously any more? Why, when there are so few paying jobs for good writers, do these tools continue to spout their nonsense? All I can conclude is that there’s never a price to be paid armchair warmongers. Warmongering is something that the other dudes who read, pay, and promote these guys like.
The big mistake would have been not to go along with the warmongering in the first place, like Phil Donahue. (Who??)