Iran releases British marines -- heads must roll!

A good functional definition of neoconservative, Krauthammer-style: someone who is unperturbed when war fails, but enraged when diplomacy succeeds.

Update: The Guardian reveals how thoroughly Krauthammer channels Bushthink, and that even our staunchest ... um, allies, recoil now. When the U.S. offered assistance after the British marines were taken hostage, the Blair government responded:

The British declined the offer and said the US could calm the situation by staying out of it.

"The US could calm the situation by staying out of it." I would have to work very hard at finding a more succinct precis on the role of the Bush regime in virtually every foreign policy context.

Update II: Kristol seconds that emotion.

This morning, Kristol again promoted the concept of war with Iran. He said Iran’s kidnapping of the 15 British soldiers has brought the world closer to another war. “We came closer to war with Iran this week,” Kristol said, complaining that the U.S. was “very passive.”

Juan Williams then questioned, “Well, what was the alternative? To go in and strike them while the hostages were there?” Kristol said “yes.”

When a classmate in my college macroeconomics class pointed out that the theory the prof had just chalked out was contradicted by reality, the prof replied, "The real world is a special case and need not concern us here." I always thought he said it tongue in cheek. But who knows -- maybe he was an early neocon.