RELAX -- IT'S NOT 2002

A lot of folks in the left blogosphere are upset at the appearance of a New York Times op-ed urging the U.S. to bomb North Korea. The op-ed is by Jeremi Suri, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin.

It's hard not to read this op-ed and think back to 2002, when policy wonks like Kenneth Pollack were making bellicosity safe for liberals. But it's not 2002 anymore. North Korea probably won't be the next Iraq, largely for one reason: the president is a Democrat. That means that if we have a good old-fashioned violent, jingoist rally-'round-the-flag moment, no Republican is going to get the glory. So, for the party that invariably sets the terms of such debates, what would be the point?

I know, I know: sometimes the point is to browbeat the hippie liberal Democrats into supporting a military action, so we can all watch them demonstrate that they hate freedom, and then watch them recant and be shamed. But this president has taken that option off the table: he's a Democrat, but he's shown he's willing to kill certain people of non-European descent in extremely nasty ways. He's beaten Republicans to the hippie-punching punch!

So the war drums aren't going to be beaten in the usual ways. The ultimate aim of all that Republican militarism is always the same: domestic political gain. But they can't take advantage in this presidency, so there's no reason to try.