Ignoring the particular comment in question, Tom Bell is an extremely smart and insightful individual; he is one of those people that when you find yourself disagreeing with him, you should immediately re-examine your assumptions. He is well-known in circles that are less than mainstream, as his area of expertise and writing is usually the market dynamics of legal and political systems (while dabbling in writings in surprisingly diverse areas). I am almost surprised to see him quoted here, and when he bothers to offer opinions on political matters it is not a bad idea to pay attention; while he generally avoids political commentary, his political analysis is frequently as deeply incisive as Rush's and far, far better than pundits like Coulter or Hannity. Just an FYI on this guy since I suspect most Freepers haven't heard of him; he has a low profile but he is extremely reputable to those familiar with his work and indisputably brilliant.
While I had not heard this particular theory, now that I think about it, I find Bell's hypothesis fairly compelling and it makes sense from a political calculus perspective. Just because conservatives have bloodlust does not make it a good idea to go to war. Going to war is short-sighted and foolish if one can avoid it.
Yes, your guy Bell sounds like just the sort of fellow you should look to for your thinking.