Pat Buchanan Basically Just Writing Fanfiction Now

From his latest column in Human Events:

“Diplomacy has failed,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told AIPAC, “Iran is on the verge of becoming nuclear and we cannot afford that.” [. . . .]

But to Graham’s point, if we are going to start this war, prudence dictates that we destroy Iran’s ability to fight back. At a minimum, we would have to use airstrikes and cruise missiles to hit a range of targets. [. . . .]

To prevent a counterattack, the United States would have to take out Iran’s 14 airfields and all its warplanes on the ground. We would also have to sink every warship and submarine in Iran’s navy and destroy some 200 missile, patrol and speedboats operated by the Revolutionary Guard, else they
would be dropping mines and mauling our warships.

Also, it would be crucial on day one to hit Iran’s launch sites and missile plants for, like Saddam in 1991, Iran would probably attack Israel, to make it an American and Israeli war on an Islamic republic.

Despite an utter lack of evidence that anyone actually in power wants it, yes, Pat Buchanan is planning a war against Iran, treating its commencement as a foregone conclusion, and trying to find someone to blame for it, if it’s started early. But the real kicker is this: what concessions must be made to the exigencies of wartime, once Buchanan’s fictional war is started? Glad you asked:

Would we have to intern all Iranian nationals in the United States, as we did Germans and Italians in 1941?

Although, in Beckian fashion, he masks it by “just asking a question,” in Buchanan’s fantasty world, once a war is started, all Iranian nationals could be jailed on the force of their national origin alone. Note, too, the critical omission from his historical narrative: the last time we interned enemy nationals, the real victims weren’t the Germans (approx. 11,000 interned) or the Italians (approx. 1,500 interned), both of whom were only targeted for internment on an individual basis only, but the Japanese (approx. 110,000 interned), who were interned based on nothing more than their national origin, and choice to reside in the western United States. Repeating this course of action would require repeating one of the most nakedly racist acts this country has ever taken — racial profiling writ large, with concentration camps and everything. It would also be unconstitutional. See Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944). Be glad this guy and his fellow travelers are out of power. Let’s keep it that way.

Advertisements

4 comments

  1. I think you’re getting overworked, A.

    Buchanan isn’t arguing for the war, he’s arguing against it for precisely those same reasons: There’s no evidence that Iran has WMDs, they wouldn’t use them even if they had them, and the negative consequences of a war would outweigh the benefits. A good analysis of the situation all around.

  2. You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. Have you listened to anything Buchanan has said on TV or written about Iran?

    He is a fervent opponent of taking military action against Iran just as he was against invading Iraq. He has been writing and talking about how the neoconservatives as well as the Israel lobby have been beating the war drums on Iran. If you were to do any research you would find that Buchanan is a non-interventionist and is heavily criticized and shunned by the neoconservatives which the GOP is primarily made up of.

    He supports pulling troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, unlike Obama.

    I don’t mean to be rude, but I just came across this post randomly and I just couldn’t believe how misinformed the author is about Buchanan’s foreign policy views.

  3. First, “unlike Obama” finds no foundation in reality. Maybe Obama hasn’t done it yet, but he campaigned on it, and if believe if all that’s required, as of Buchanan, then Obama checks the box too.

    You and Lanfranc are otherwise right, which I missed – but I’d note that treating a war as inevitable, and detention as a necessary consequence, are still both pretty weird.

  4. tiger tim · ·

    FACT IS –‘isolationist/populist/right-wing’ Pat
    is very much in step as de facto homefront cover
    man for our decades long dumb-down, sellout and
    fold before history’s –MOST– awesomely genocidal regime –ACROSS the Pacific.

    It’s TRUE. Just watch –whenever addressing
    the East Asia scene he’s forever tut-tutting the
    looming dangers and implications —forgetting
    anything resembling a ‘moral’ issue, to say
    nothing of persistently, scandalously downsizing
    the staggering ‘peacetime’ death tolls of social
    engineering in our ‘fave’ creditor’s happy
    kingdom.

    The WWII ‘right’ ‘revisionism’, to say nothing of Hollywood’s ad nauseum PC WWII retreading
    —are BOTH working toward this aim of
    US takedown.

    ESP. galling on this, the once again ‘mysteriously overlooked’ 60th Anniversary of the epic, urgently relevant and once again ‘mysteriously overlooked’ —KOREAN WAR!

%d bloggers like this: