The Wall Street Journal sees some positives in Obama's choice of Joe Biden as VP—foremost among them that:
...he brings some realism to national security questions, realizing that there are men and nations in the world that wish America harm and that sometimes they have to be confronted. He voted for the Iraq war in 2002, understanding that Saddam Hussein was a threat, and he waited longer than the other Democratic Presidential candidates to turn against the war.
They contrast Biden's "realism" with the coterie of "superdoves who populate Mr. Obama's national security councils", citing in particular Susan Rice. To get a feeling for Rice's superdove credentials, here she is talking about Iraq in December of 2002, in the runup to the invasion:
"It's clear that Iraq poses a major threat. It's clear that its weapons of mass destruction need to be dealt with forcefully, and that's the path we're on. I think the question becomes whether we can keep the diplomatic balls in the air and not drop any, even as we move forward, as we must, on the military side."
And here's what this hardcore superdove was saying in 2005:
Finally, if and when we succeed in our mission to establish a stable, secure and democratic Iraq, U.S. national security will be enhanced by our complete withdrawal. [...] Why not base our troops in more safe, friendly environs where they can be deployed rapidly to go after Al Qaeda elements and provide a credible deterrent against truly dangerous and hostile regimes, such as those in Iran and North Korea?
Now at this point you may be somewhat confused about the seemingly subtle distinction the WSJ is drawing between a "realist" and a "superdove", so I've put together a partial taxonomy to explain the differences:
- realist: Wants to kill people in countries that pose no threat to us whatsoever
- dove: Pejorative term for "realist"
- superdove: Wants to kill people in countries that pose no threat to us whatsoever, but does think we should stop killing them once we "succeed in our mission", thus freeing us to kill people in other countries that pose no threat to us whatsoever
- mega giganto maxidove: May sometimes require a UN Security Council resolution before they're willing to support killing people in countries that pose no threat to us whatsoever
- pacifist peacenik America-hating appeaser "dove": Believes violence should be used only as a last resort, typically in self-defense against a genuine threat. These people are clinically insane and should be ignored.
- extreme dual overhead cam ne plus ultra pentium turbo dove: Rejects violence unconditionally, even in self-defense. These people are also clinically insane and should be ignored, unless they're Jesus, in which case they are the infallible source of moral truth and should be worshiped as all-powerful deities in addition to being ignored.
I hope that clears things up.
Comments