Some people’s thinking on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is downright scary.  War, itself, is unsettling enough as it is, but when you add in the thinking Mr. Happy has displayed and been persuaded by over the last seven-plus years, it’s scarier still.  Yesterday’s talking head Sunday offerings brought that to a new level, however, when the (wink, wink) “fair and balanced” network brought us some doomsday chatter.

We all know the flexing of might and muscle our country has shown toward Iran during Mr. Happy’s rule.   It’s unnerving that Iran is actively developing the technology to build nuclear bombs, and there probably aren’t many people who don’t believe they are.  To be sure, Iran is not a friendly nation, and its leaders are not rational in the same sense we use that term here. It’s also an active participant in the Iraq war, and some of our losses in life can be attributed to its involvement as the supplier of weapons and logistics, if not fighters.

The flexing by Israel recently in war games practice that gave every appearance of being a mock raid on Iran sent alarm throughout the Middle East that was felt, in fact, all over the world.  It was not thinly veiled, and that had to be by design, too.  Iran has taken the position that Israel should not exist, and one must assume the worst if and when Iran’s nuclear weapons development bears fruit.  Best estimates put that date years in the future, however.

So, with that backdrop, let’s listen in on that Sunday discussion.  It centered around presidential politics and the Iraq War/Iran positions taken by Barack Obama and John McCain, one of whom will be sworn in as president in seven months.  Obama has been the stronger advocate of bringing our troops home sooner rather than later and ending our fighting presence in Iraq than has been McCain.  While Obama has stated that the dog’s dinner that is our presence in Iraq was a mistake from the beginning, McCain has remained supportive, generally, of the stated reasons for the U.S. invastion.  McCain believes the war needs to be “won,” although to date has yet to define “winning,” while Obama wants to begin immediately the tactical planning for troop withdrawals with an eye toward its implementation sometime in 2009.  This is a paraphrase of the respective positions, and when the commentators finished highlighting them, the talk turned darker still.

Imagine, if you will, Mr. Happy watching the campaign and basing his foreign policy and war decisions upon the politics of the election.  Imagine Mr. Happy sensing that Obama is going to win in November.  Imagine him, then, thinking he needs to act quickly to invoke and implement the “Bush Doctrine” of pre-emptive war against Iran because he believes Obama won’t.  Imagine Mr. Happy creating that as the country’s foreign policy Obama would inherit as his successor. After watching him for these past seven plus years, it’s not hard to imagine any of this, frankly.

Never mind your politics for a moment, and forget just for a second your party affiliation and your intended vote come November.  These talking heads were tacitly urging Mr. Happy to consider this as sound policy decision; that if he saw an Obama victory in the cards, he should take that initiative and put us in a third war front as his parting gesture.

An apparent Obama victory would signify a collective vote of no confidence in Mr. Happy, something which these folks on the network were suggesting he ignore.  With the release today of another poll result showing an 84% disapproval rating in the current direction of our country, it is not hard to envision that no-confidence vote come November, and yet some were thinking yesterday that Mr. Happy would take it upon himself to disregard the American sentiment and bring us to the brink once again while he still had the chance to do so.

Some people’s thinking on the wars is downright scary.