Re: John Hess on the "debate"

[Carl Remick <carlremick@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Counterpunch, September 22, 2004
>
> Faking a Difference
> A Serious Debate?
> By JOHN L. HESS
>
> David Brooks takes on the neocon side. Typically, he begins by praising
> Kerry for finally taking a stand. He asks a keen question about drawing
> down our forces -- what do you say to the last man who dies before you
> finish pulling out. His column is typical of Brooks -- pretending to
> look at it sympathetically from our side, while slipping in a dart now
> and then. ...

David Brooks' faux reasonableness is very irritating.  Justin Raimondo has
this acute Brooks observation in his current column:

"A recent David Brooks column tried to frame the Iraq War debate in terms of
'hawk vs. hawk,' pitting 'gradualists,' who want to win by making
incremental gains, against 'confrontationalists,' who want to climb over
piles of bodies in pursuit of 'victory.' As usual, the neocons seek to
define their opponents out of existence: nonintervention, according to their
parameters, is completely beyond the pale."

<http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3628>

Carl