Apparently, as Pat Buchanan has put it,
crass Israeli politics
require the use of American military technology to create what looks ominously like a first class humanitarian disaster in the Gaza Strip – and, no doubt, US acquiescence in it. Consequently, a discussion which has developed on Daniel Larison’s Eunomia blog at The American Conservative raises a question which will become increasingly important: Do these Israeli-boosting Violence Junkies personified by Victor Davis Hanson have any sense? In Those Crazy “Middle Eastern” Doctrines on January 1st, Larison mused:
Not that it should surprise anyone, but Victor Davis Hanson does not understand the doctrine of proportionality…As the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it, “the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated.” (2309)
This produced a reasonable response from Chris Sastre
As regards Victor Davis Hanson - everything I have read of his, principally at NRO…seems to revolve around a central tenet of finding ways to justify and rationalize military intervention, both committed and proposed, as a prime mover in American foreign policy
going on to ask, essentially, is Hanson worth taking seriously? It happens VDARE.com has dealt with this issue: What use is Victor Davis Hanson? in 2005 theorised that Hanson’s main utility was blocking access to the media by more able and less subservient writers, partly because he could be trusted to eventually give way on anything crucial. It linked to an incisive study of his scholarly work: The Case of Victor Davis Hanson: Farmer, Scholar, WarMonger, by F. Roger Devlin, The Occidental Quarterly Winter 2003. (Bleg: It also linked to a brilliant essay on Hanson by the War Nerd, Gary Brecher, in the now defunct publication The Exile. Can anyone find this in Cyberspace?) [UPDATE: Victor Hanson: Portrait of an American Traitor, Gary Brecher, The Exile, July 28, 2005 ] How Hanson fits into the American opinion market was defined on VDARE in Hanson’s Mexifornia: Brimelow Speaks!
...Mexifornia’s reception by establishment conservativism has been surprisingly favorable. Even the Wall Street Journal editorial page, notoriously Stalinist in its suppression of immigration critics, permitted an uneasily respectful review. It is painfully apparent that this is because of the accident of military historian Hanson’s cheerleading for the Iraq War in National Review and elsewhere. (In contrast, establishment liberalism has ignored the book...No review has appeared in the New York Times or Washington Post.)
The review also noted Hanson’s desperation not offend establishment MSM prejudices on matters of I.Q or Operation Wetback. So that is Victor Davis Hanson. Like a household slave in classical times he is allowed a humble existence in the outbuildings. But he must come rushing out with rationalizations for military action in the Middle East whenever summoned. And asking if any of this is in the best interests of America is definitely not his place. Looks like he is going to be busy.