Uh oh.
Vice President Dick Cheney, arriving in Philadelphia today to watch economic stimulus rebate checks processed at a government financial center, had a thick hardcover book tucked under his arm as he got off Air Force Two at Willow Grove Naval Air Station.
Aides said the book was "Retribution: The Battle for Japan, 1944-45," by the British historian Max Hastings.
So, what is the essence of the book? According to Amazon:
But when it comes to Retribution's central theme -- that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were wholly justified and necessary to persuade a recalcitrant enemy to surrender -- Hastings abandons his critical faculties. He is not content simply to argue that "the fate which befell Japan in 1945" was "retributive justice" for that country's misdeeds. In language reminiscent of the patriotically correct criticism of the Smithsonian's attempt in 1995 to mount an exhibit about the Enola Gay, Hastings asserts, "The myth that the Japanese were ready to surrender anyway has been so comprehensively discredited by modern research that it is astonishing some writers continue to give it credence." He calls these unnamed writers "peddlers of fantasies."
I hope that Cheney isn't using this book to steel himself for some sort of apocalyptic climax to eight years in power:
But Hastings rejects moral equivalency. Defending the use of the atom bomb, he essentially argues that by the cruel logic of war, the Japanese beckoned fate. "War is inherently inhumane," he writes, "but the Japanese practiced extraordinary refinements of inhumanity in the treatment of those thrown upon their mercy." Sadism by the Japanese was not occasional but institutional. Prisoners of war and civilian internees were starved, bayoneted, beheaded, raped and, in some cases, vivisected
Replace "Iranians" with "Japanese in the bold part and you can see what is in his man-safe hard head.
I am normally not a "OMG!!!! We're attacking Iran TOMMORROW!!!" alarmist. But, things do seem to be rolling in a certain direction. The Ron Burgandy of arms control, complete with ridiculous head hair, John Bolton, is openly and rabidly calling for strikes on Iran:
Mr Bolton said that striking Iran would represent a major step towards victory in Iraq. While he acknowledged that the risk of a hostile Iranian response harming American’s overseas interests existed, he said the damage inflicted by Tehran would be "far higher" if Washington took no action.
"This is a case where the use of military force against a training camp to show the Iranians we’re not going to tolerate this is really the most prudent thing to do," he said. "Then the ball would be in Iran’s court to draw the appropriate lesson to stop harming our troops."
And the sycophantic ass lickers at the Conservative House Organs Pravda and Novosti the National Review and The Weekly Standard are goose stepping in lockstep right along. In fact, with the Weekly Standard and The Jerusalem Post both owned by the same foul, Australian entity, it's almost like this is being orchestrated:
It isn't just the American neocons, but also the Israelis, who are escalating the "Attack Iran" campaign. The Jerusalem Post yesterday "reported" that "with Iran racing forward with its nuclear program, Israel now believes the Islamic Republic will master centrifuge technology and be able to begin enriching uranium on a military scale this year" (h/t quick strategy) and:
The new assessment moves up Israel's forecasts on Teheran's nuclear program by almost a full year -- from 2009 to the end of 2008. According to the new timeline, Iran could have a nuclear weapon by the middle of next year.
According to several commenters, the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. was on Fox News this morning making the same fear-mongering claim.
Didn't the owner of The Weekly Standard, Fox News and The Jerusalem Post throw a fund raiser for one of the Democratic candidates?
Anyway, like I said, I am not an Iran alarmist. But, things are starting to set off my Spidey Sense.