Overcompensation

Michael Barone's latest article is about how the foiling of the London plot puts all of us liberals in our places, and he takes the time to remind us all of Neville Chamberlain, who apparently was more manly and capable than modern liberals. See Neville Chamberlain offered Hitler Czechoslovakia and liberals are offering Iran and Syria the opportunity to continue existing. Now it sounds like Neville was offering a bit more but you have to remember to adjust for inflation.

Anyway Republicans like to bring up Neville Chamberlain because they want to distance themselves from him. You see Republicans were the Neville Chamberlains of the 1930s and 1940s. While Roosevelt was doing what he could to wake people up to the threat of Hitler, many Republicans didn't see the threat. This included Prescott Bush who saw Fascism as a viable system for the US. In fairness he saw it as an alternative to Communism, but he apparently liked what he saw, more or less.

So today when you hear a Republican banging on about Neville chamberlain, just be patient with them. There's always a tendency to over compensate.

As for the substance of Barones complaint, as you might expect, it's nonsense. The Brits rounded up this plot not through invading another country, but through old fashioned law enforcement methods. The same methods Republicans have been making fun of since 2001.

You see here's the difference between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to terrorism. Republicans open their toolbox and immediately grab for the Military Options tool. Democrats on the other hand see the whole range of options. Political pressure, diplomacy, police methods, the CIA, and last, and somewhat least, Military intervention. The military is a big and necessary tool, but it's best if one can avoid using it too often.

And the success in Britain hints that maybe we don't have to rely on the military to catch terrorists.