Surely War is Not the Answer

I hope those who read my postings on this blog can appreciate that I have worked very hard to keep them apolitical. It is my strong view that this is not about left or right, conservative or liberal, Democrat or Republican. My posts specifically center around the economy, and though I intend to expand into other areas of public policy on this blog soon, I am proud of the fact that no political position is advocated here.

That being said, I was appalled at David Broder's column in the Washington Post today in which his recovery to the economic solution is: war with Iran.

Look back at FDR and the Great Depression. What finally resolved that economic crisis? World War II.

Here is where Obama is likely to prevail. With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran's ambition to become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve.

Nice to see that Obama would benefit politically, too. Of course, Broder lets himself off the hook with:

I am not suggesting, of course, that the president incite a war to get reelected. But the nation will rally around Obama because Iran is the greatest threat to the world in the young century. If he can confront this threat and contain Iran's nuclear ambitions, he will have made the world safer and may be regarded as one of the most successful presidents in history.

I'm not suggesting war, but boy would it be helpful!

We have seen a lot of resources and a lot of ideas on how to hasten the economic recovery which we can all agree is coming far too slowly. I'd humbly suggest from a public policy point of view that war is a last-resort kind of answer, if it is one at all.