Allahpundit put it well in his lede to this story: This is precisely the sort of "casually dickish," strawman-driven aspersion, borne of Barack Obama's cosmic narcissism and arrogance and sneering contempt for their declared enemies - the GOP - that this White House has been vomiting on us for the past seven years without interruption or letup. It's one of The One's most cherished pasttimes:
White House press [phallus] Josh Earnest said Friday that Republicans seemed “unhappy” that ten U.S. Navy sailors, captured by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard this week were released, and said following their advice would have led to war…
“I think the only people unhappy about it are the Republicans for some reason,” Earnest told reporters…
“If followed advice of some of the Republican critics of the administration, we’d probably be in a bloody war with Iran right now over our sailors,” Earnest added. “The fact is our sailors right now are out of harms way.”
Deliberately calculated, egotistical obtusity. The issue is not the sailors' release, but that the Iranians felt and feel emboldenedly and brazenly free to commit acts of war against the United States - which this incident most definitely was. That's what's so infuriating about Earnest's slur; he accuses us of "wanting war with Iran," when the fact is that they're already at war with us and this White House will neither acknowledge it or their central role and culpability in turning us into a patsy, victim, and target. They think that selling out to the mullahs, appeasing and groveling to and prostrating themselves before them - like John Kerry's apologizing to Tehran for "forcing" them to unprovokedly attack and seize to U.S. naval vessels - is "principled diplomacy". They're bragging about it. They're proud of it. It's like they're calling us stupid knuckle-draggers for being incapable of grasping what a diplomatic "masterstroke" this supposedly was.
It's this, in essence.
And as is this White House's MO, the spokesdick doubled down on the pussy-assed insanity:
Earnest said he did not believe the treatment of the captives related to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits the use of prisoners for propaganda.
“When it comes to the Geneva conventions, my understanding is that it primarily applies to prisoners of war,” Earnest said. “Based on what I’ve been told, the Geneva convention does not apply in this particular circumstance.” [emphasis added]
There's the veritigo-inducing, "don't believe your lying eyes" surreality again. Those ten U.S. sailors absolutely were prisoners of war, because they were prisoners seized in an act of war. There's no other way to define them. Even worse, this White House is refusing to apply the Geneva Convention to our enemies in Tehran even as they misapply it to the jihadist "detainees" in Gitmo that this Regime can't turn loose to return to trying to murder us all fast enough.
And why, over and above their being a bunch of dicks? Because so invested is Barack Obama in his treasonous sellout to the mullahs on their nukes and pretty much everything else that he will never, under any circumstances, acknowledge that a state of war is even hypothetically possible between Iran and the U.S. even after they commence nuking our cities off the map one by one. His response in that eventual inevitability will be that we still have cities that haven't been nuked off the map, only his "principled diplomacy" can protect them, and Republicans are "warmongers" for "wanting war with Iran" to defend ourselves.
We are in terrible, frightening danger, my friends, and it's not from Tehran, or Moscow, or Beijing, or Pyongyang, or Raqqa, but 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue itself. Elections do, indeed, have consequences, but never before this dire - and, most likely, never again.