In all the commentary I've encountered yet dealing with the impending war, this is one of the sanest things I've read yet.

You'd be surprised how much warnicks dwell on the rantings of the stupid fringe of the anti-war movement. They take a dumb anti-war argument, coming from a dumb anti-war activist and have a good laugh and somehow think they've made a contribution to the debate. The reality is that stupid people are on both sides of the debate and are best ignored. [...] If we want to be serious about debating the virtues of war, then both sides should deal with the best the other side has to offer, not the worst.

All we need to do now is get both sides to lift their game, for the pro-war team to do better than Ann Coulter and for the anti-war team to do better than seven hundred naked women on a hillside. The above linked post is, incidentally, part of an evidently ongoing series (here's parts one and two) answering both pro- and anti-war arguments. Well worth reading.

--
Memo to John Humphreys: consider the ALS linked. That "something good" you mentioned better be on its way soon. I don't operate on karma, you know. :)

posted by James Russell | 10:05 PM