NR and NRO seem lately to have become hotbeds of anti-Gersonism. (My contribution to the genre is in our most recent print edition.) But I’m not sure this op-ed of Gerson’s really justifies beating him up. He wants a tougher policy toward Iran and Syria, and makes a reasonable case for it. Given that his op-ed is well to the right of the center of gravity of the public debate about these matters, does it really make sense for hawks to choose him as a target?