John Kerry gets guest space in the NY Times on the Saturday of Labor Day weekend - geez, I guess whatever it is couldn't wait until the day after Thanksgiving.
Kerry is exhorting the world to rally itself into a grand coalition to battle ISIS, or ISIL, or whatever. Maybe agreeing on a name would be a useful first step for this coalition.
Kerry's message of fear is totally at odds with Obama's message of numb complacency; per the Times, Obama is telling donors we are "pretty safe", and these mixed messages have the WaPo alarmed. But it is Kerry's conclusion that leaves us laughing:
Coalition building is hard work, but it is the best way to tackle a common enemy. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, the first President George Bush and Secretary of State James A. Baker III did not act alone or in haste. They methodically assembled a coalition of countries whose concerted action brought a quick victory.
Extremists are defeated only when responsible nations and their peoples unite to oppose them.
I know you remember that Kerry voted in favor of the 2003 Iraq attack by Bush 43 because he spent the whole 2004 campaign repudiating it. And he voted for the war in 2003 because he voted against it in 1991!
Say it with me - he was against the Bush 41 coalition before he was for it.
As to the notion that the world stage today has counterparts to Bush, Baker and Thatcher - we wish it were so.
BUT ON THE BRIGHT SIDE (WHICH IS ALSO THE DARK SIDE): Nixon went to China, so maybe Obama and Kerry are especially well-positioned to put together a coalition of warrior-nations. Maybe! But who will join a coalition formed by Red Line Barry and Johnny Waffles when six months later they will be leading the protests against it?