To set the following clip in context, it follows a lengthy excerpt of a discussion on Hardball between Chris Matthews and Patrick Buchanan, the latter hardly a flaming liberal, in which Buchanan lays out a wonderfully real politique case for engagement with Iran over matters of vital mutual interest, rather than the path of continued hostility and the ramping up of the rhetoric leading to some kind of military confrontation. In the wake of President Mahmoud Ahmedinajad's (the other day I called him "Achmed" - what a doozy of a blooper!) visit to the UN and speech at Columbia University (where he wasn't exactly warmly received), it seems highly appropriate that a noted right-winger like Buchanan would cite reasons international diplomacy exist, and their application in re Iran are preferable to war. After this lengthy excerpting, Greenwald writes:
There really is this child-like need in American mainstream political discourse constantly to believe that we are fault-free and that when there is hostility directed at us from other parts of the world, it is always baffling and unjustified and crazy and malicious. And the accompanying cartoon-like belief is that anyone who has hostility towards the U.S. is some demented, crazed, Hitler-like monster.
It really ought not be that difficult to understand that a country which rules the world by military force; invades, bombs and occupies other countries far more than anyone else; overthrows other countries' governments -- including their democratically elected ones -- and openly debates what other governments it should change; and issues endless lectures to the world about the evils of tyranny and nuclear weapons while constantly violating those sermons (and encouraging our allies to do so) with actions, is going to trigger rather intense and substantial hostility around the world, particularly in those regions where we are doing the invading, bombing, occupying and controlling. As George Washington explained quite clearly a couple hundred years ago, that is precisely why it is so ill-advised to engage in that behavior.
The idea that we are the source of all Good in the world and that all anti-American anger is irrational is just the opposite side of the same Manichean coin that holds that the U.S. is the principal source of evil in the world. But while the latter form of irrational moralism is relegated to the fringes (at least in American politics), the former predominates in virtually all political discussions. On an individual level, most people have little difficulty understanding that a refusal to recognize one's own faults is one of the most self-destructive attributes a person can possess. But when it comes to the U.S. collectively, recognizing America's faults -- the actions we take to trigger anti-American animus -- is virtually prohibited.
I also think this particular quote is appropriately contextual regarding Marshall's comments on another thread that he does not accept the idea that the United States has engaged in war crimes.
