There's a real question regarding where this stupor mundi came from, what with his senate run being well-funded by the usual neo-con suspects, and the hard-right economic Spartans--Club for Growth besides; to launching this letter with 46 GOP confederates and then having a nice little handshake to-do with defense contractors. (His confederates have varyingly dumb ideas of why they went along with this.)
I notice that after making waves this past week with the big old not exactly treason letter to the leaders of Iran, where he got enough condescending and wrong in that it should actually encourage him to not continue being a great ginormous tool--he dug in. He says Iran "must disarm". But Iran has not been determined to have actually ever managed to enrich uranium to the point of having a weapon, nor have they been determined to have a weapons plan in mind. They have repeatedly said they don't. Not actually having a diplomatic plan in place with access to inspectors will let them continue building centrifuges and maybe they'll have a bomb and maybe they won't, but the funny old thing is--most nations that have the blasted things don't use them--anyone notice that? Russia, China, Pakistan? They just have them and don't use them. Almost as if they were more like a deterrent weapon--to deter other countries from starting shit with them. Hm. So like, aggression against them might be more encouragement Iran needs such a weapon?
So it's almost like real intelligence indicates Iran most likely isn't pursuing nukes and even if they had then, it's not to use them, but to keep crazy-asses like Netanyahu from thinking they could dump on Iran with impunity--not that that's the only way of looking at it, but it's a plausible one.
So wouldn't it be nice if we at least had the assurance of inspections? If we just had the transparency and open channels diplomacy might create?
Oh no--because Cotton learned something--you need to go on the offensive. He learned that fighting in Iraq, don't you know. Where everyone was very happy the US went in for regime change, apparently, and everything went honky dory and we got exactly the kind of stable regime that prevented more terrorism. Oh. Wait--that didn't happen! Oh, wait, history tells us it hardly ever happens.
So, while Tom Cotton is doing his little media-circuit and revealing other kinds of ignorance, like astonishment that Iran controls Tehran, and surprise that somehow (maybe it was because of the Iraq War?) they also have inordinate influence in Iraq, can we possibly consider that rookie Senators might have less-informed opinions that do not merit the sway of the entire august body of the Senate? And might one add that this little stunt has done for the image of the United States something akin to the presence of 47 little Neville Chamberlains in tan suits?
In any event, doesn't Cotton almost look like he's worth the cash sunk in him! He could very easily have turned into a thinking man, with his education. But he'll go further this way, no? By knee-jerking his way to a war with Iran. As if that was somehow not worth a trillion dollars or more to our debt and the deaths of 4000 or more good fighting men and women.
I don't think I care for this character very much. He's creepy.