Every day that goes back the actual ideological difference between Barack Obama and Tucker Carlson seems to shrivel away. And I don’t just say that because both men have a habit of bowing to wealthy Muslim sugar daddies in the Gulf region.
Take this latest argument from the ‘Tucker Carlson Network’ and its newsletter.
What are the chances Iran would actually launch a nuclear attack? History suggests they’re zero, no matter what Senator Graham says. No country in the so-called “Axis of Evil” has ever deployed a nuke, because doing so would be an act of suicide. In fact, the United States is the only nation to unleash its nuclear might as an act of war. It’s strange how Washington considers that a point of pride.
Could the Iranians obtaining The Bomb wind up being a good thing? Whether anyone in the foreign policy establishment admits it, North Korea’s nuclearization has undeniably stabilized the Korean Peninsula. The region has seen no wars, coups, or interventionist-forced regime changes since 2006.
Would Iran becoming a nuclear power have the same effect on its region? Could it finally prompt America to leave the area alone, and incentivize Israel to drop its stated goal of controlling the Gaza Strip and the West Bank? Would it make the Iranian government less oppressive because it wouldn’t have to worry about the West’s constant decapitation ambitions?
This makes perfect sense if you’re operating from the Obama perspective that all the problems abroad are actually caused by America.
Barack Obama started his negotiations with Iran from the same perspective as Tucker’s, telling his negotiators to be very understanding of the trauma that Iran suffered at the hands of America, and trying to limit America’s international power.
Adopt that same flipped perspective in which America is a global threat “it’s strange how Washington considers that a point of pride” and its possession of nukes is a problem, then the Iranians, the North Koreans and anyone else getting a bomb is a good thing because we’re the problem.
We and Israel and anyone else who doesn’t bow to Mecca.
The good news is that we already have the New York Times and Noam Chomsky to introduce us to exciting views like these. The bad news is that Tucker Carlson is peddling their leftovers to MAGA while trying to make it seem like he’s taking on some evil forces of ‘warmongers’ and ‘neocons’ when he just sounds like a slightly younger Bernie Sanders.
What this isn’t, is MAGA. Non-interventionism is very different than believing, as Obama did and Tucker does, that America is a force for evil in the world and that if the folks who chant ‘Death to America’ and call us the ‘Great Satan’ get nukes, it’s a good thing because we really are the ‘Great Satan’ and they’ll be able to prevent us from attacking them.
This isn’t MAGA. This is Marxism.
The real problem isn’t Tucker’s ideas, it’s that he’s completely dishonest about them. He trots out UN officials to bash America, but doesn’t disclose who they are, he tries to defend Maduro by falsely claiming that he’s socially conservative because he knows his audience hates Marxism. Does Tucker hate Marxism? The old Tucker at least claimed to. The new one sounds like a Marxist.
