Thank goodness there is at least one actual libertarian in Congress who is willing to turn an appropriately skeptical eye to the nonsense that emanates from the White House:

While the president’s announcement that an additional 20,000 troops would be sent to Iraq dominated the headlines last week, the real story was the president’s sharp rhetoric towards Iran and Syria.  And recent moves by the administration only serve to confirm the likelihood of a wider conflict in the Middle East.            

The president stated last week that, “Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending  its territorial integrity –  and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria.” He also announced the deployment of an additional aircraft carrier battle group to the Persian Gulf, and the deployment of 
Patriot air missile defense systems to countries in the Middle East.
   Meanwhile, US troops stormed the Iranian consulate in Iraq and detained several Iranian diplomats. Taken together, the message was clear: 
the administration intends to move the US closer to a dangerous and ill-advised conflict with Iran.            

As I said last week on the House floor, speculation in Washington focuses on when,        not if, either Israel or the U.S. will bomb Iran – possibly with nuclear weapons. The accusation sounds very familiar: namely, that Iran possesses weapons of mass destruction. Iran has never been found in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and our own Central Intelligence Agency says Iran is more than ten years away from producing any kind of nuclear weapon. Yet we are told we must act immediately while we still can!          

This all sounds very familiar, but many of my colleagues don’t seem to have learned much from the invasion of Iraq. House Democrats strongly criticized the Iraq troop surge after the president’s announcement, but then praised the president’s confrontational words condemning Iran….

We need to reject the increasingly shrill rhetoric coming from the same voices who urged the president to invade Iraq.
            

The truth is that Iran, like Iraq, is a third-world nation without a significant military. Nothing in history hints that she is likely to invade a neighboring country, let alone America or Israel. I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin-type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran.

He is not the only one so concerned.  I reitreate my hope that we are all wrong.