Off The Table
Lot’s of blogospheric debate about whether Democratic candidates should say that war with Iran is “off the table.” I guess, the argument is that for some quasi-macho political reason you can’t ever say war is off the table because that will show you’re weak. Or something. That’s what Ken Baer implies here. Why should we listen to what Ken Baer has to say, you ask? Good question. Ezra provides a nice smack-down here.
I don’t think this is very complicated. War with Iran is a terrible idea, substantively, so why wouldn’t you want to say: “We’re not going to do this terrible, stupid thing” publicly? I guess there’s some international-game-of-chicken aspect to the whole thing, the same way during the Cold War, no one would have said nuking the USSR was off the table. But I’m wondering in the context of Iran, what benefit “keeping all options on the table” provides, other than bolstering the reactionary cabal that rules the country and providing a ration incentive to pursue a nuclear weapon.