Kerry on War

The New Republic, not usually considered a part of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, has a scathing editorial(registration required) on Kerry's position regarding the future of Iraq.

Listening to John Kerry's recent evolution on Iraq makes us wistful for the John Kerry of old--the John Kerry whose position on the war was contorted to the point of near incomprehension. True, the candidate's explanation of his 2002 vote to authorize force against Iraq may have varied by campaign stop, and true, his vote against the $87 billion for reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan represented the triumph of politics over policy. But, looking forward, Kerry usually sounded a responsible note. In April, for example, Kerry said "it would be unwise beyond belief for the United States of America to leave a failed Iraq in its wake."

The good news is that Kerry's position on the war is no longer inscrutable. The bad news is that it is now indefensible. In the space of a month, the Democratic standard-bearer has gone from a pledge to bring troops home during his first term in the White House, to a pledge to bring troops home during his first year in office, to a pledge to bring them home during the first six months of his administration. Today, well, he just wants to bring the troops home. Hence his latest applause line: "We're going to get our troops home where they belong!"

The problem with Kerry is not simply his flip-flopping, or his position on Iran, or on his reliance on outdated and useless alliances. The main problem is his world-view in general - a pacifist, postmodern, therapeutic reliance on consensus rather than leadership. This is not something that we can afford, especially with confrontations with Iran and North Korea looming.