I will provide a propagandistic casus belli. Its credibility doesn't matter. The victor will not be asked whether he told the truth.Are the sentiments of an aggressive foreign policy. No decent person would agree that they express a moral sentiment, but some people have assimilated the message. In fact, one man on Planet Think Tank has been so bold as to, in a way, channel it.
Of course, no one would ever say something like "I follow the Hitler method" because Dolph didn't invent it. Any one who has ever wanted war and did not want to appear to be the aggressor had to at least make it appear that they had been attacked. Der Fuhrer took it all the way by dressing his men and having them feign an attack on German border positions. We would not do that.
Except maybe Patrick Clawson thinks we should,
Left out of the quote, he did say he was not advocating that, nudge, nudge, wink, wink.One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure. I mean look people, Iranian submarines periodically go down, some day one of them might not come up, who would know why? We can do a variety of things if we wish to increase the pressure... We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians. We could get nastier.
It's pretty obvious that there is a desire for war on the part of neocons though they usually don't say that. Thus it is refreshing to see some honesty even on the part of a chickenhawk wonk. There is no hypocrisy in the sense of Rochefoucauld's aphorism. Not a pretense at all to any virtue.
His sinecure is safe. He will be able to continue to perform his duties as deputy director for research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). No one will cross the street to avoid being associated with a war mongering nut case.