The American left will never accept the idea that liberating Iraq was a good thing for one over-riding reason: our failure to find weapons of mass destruction. Yet as this administration is forced to grapple with an out-of-control North Korea and a nuclear ambitious Iran, Iraq offers an example of the difference between symbolism and substance: of the three countries, the only “axis of evil” member that is no longer a nuclear problem is Iraq.

Does this matter to the “Bush lied, people died” crowd? Emphatically no. If it were up to them, the world would still be wondering what Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was capable of achieving. Remember, it was these very same people who contended that Iraq could be “contained” by international sanctions.

North Korea puts the lie to this philosophy. No regime on earth has been more “contained” than this Stalinist paean to totalitarianism. Did that stop them from detonating a nuclear device or testing missiles? Is “containment” per se a viable reality?

Iraq offers a clue. The Oil-for-Food scandal, one of the biggest kickback schemes in the history of the world, points to the idea that international “principle” is no match for billions in bribery paid to the proper government officials in a number of key countries.

But apparently even bribery has its limits. No one has been offered more “bribes” or as some like to say, “carrots” than North Korea. The Agreed Framework of 1994, put forth by the Clinton administration and its envoy, Jimmy Carter, was precisely the kind of “diplomatic solution” liberals like Barack Obama believe is the be-all and end-all of international politics. In reality it was nothing more than a contractualized bribe.

It was also a complete failure as demonstrated by the the Koreans decision to “re-negotiate”–completely on their own.

Iran? The X-factor between two approaches to international gangsterism. Iraq and North Korea are both “done deals” with respect to nuclear proliferation. Whether you believe Iraq had capabilities or not, (and one would think the story regarding 550 tons of yellowcake sold to Canada by the Iraqi government after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein would at least give people pause) we put an end Iraq’s nuclear ambitions, real or imagined. But we have to “live with” a nuclearized North Korea.

The question then becomes one of approaches towards Iran. We know what works and what doesn’t. Unfortunately, the Obama administration has put itself between a rock and a hard place. By relentlessly demonizing the Bush administration’s approach with Iraq, the “stick” has been removed from the table. Only the “carrot” remains, and as we’ve seen with North Korea, it doesn’t amount to squat. With George W. Bush the Iranians were, at the very least, forced to consider the “what if” possibilities of military strikes. On the other hand, they know Barack Obama has to consider the unenviable choice of allowing them to proceed unmolested to nuclear viability–or validating the previous administration’s policies yet again.

But this particular validation, aka “pre-emption,” would be the ultimate betrayal of an American left who, despite mountains of historical data to the contrary, believe all war is wrong.

Could the current administration withstand “Obama lied, people died” if pre-emption becomes necessary? Or will this administration allow Iran to continue on its way in order to placate the anti-war left?

Diificult choices to be sure, but perhaps the first order of business for the current president and his administration would be to remember an old saying: if you haven’t got something nice to say about somebody, don’t say anything at all. The more this administration is corralled into accepting the previous administration’s approaches to the war on terror, the more hypocritical and foolish it looks like for criticizing them in the first place.

The bet here is that the most inexperienced individual ever elected president is learning his most daunting lesson: being Commander-in-Chief is one helluva tough job.

atahlert@comcast.net

Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here