The Great West Wing Rewatch: 6.1 "NSF Thurmont"

Joel: It’s pretty obvious that this storyline was very heavily influenced by the War on Terror that was going on in real life at the time. So many of Bartlet’s scenes in the final episode of season five and this episode are about how his response can have ramifications that will impact the country for the next decade or more. There is a point where someone suggests that while America is retaliating, they should bomb Iran as well, and they would find a connection to the Gaza attack later. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this aired only two months after America first entered Iraq in 2004.  What’s all the more interesting to watching this storyline unfold a decade after it first aired. Early on in the series, Sam had a monologue about the internet and where it was headed. That scene is often pointed to with people commenting on how right The West Wing ended up in its predictions, but the show got a lot right here as well. It’s almost uncomfortable to listen to Bartlet talk about how his decisions will impact the lives of Americans ten years down the road, or how his actions will color the world's perception of America for the next several years.

Chris: I hate it when Bartlet and Leo are disagreeing and it reached a point when Leo is actually yelling at the president in the oval office but it's interesting just how much the president disagrees with just about everything his staff on this crisis. It's staggering just how blood-thirsty we, as a society, get when our country has been wronged, especially when those who wronged us is looking for a reason to escalate. Bartlet is doing his best to break pendulum of violence begetting violence, it's one thing to wish for world peace but it's another to actually do something to achieve it without obliterating your enemy to the point they're incapable of retaliating. The United States never invited the Palestinian Prime Minister to a summit meeting but no one in the Bartlet administration denied to the press or members of congress when criticized for the invitation that never technically happened. It's like the president was backed into a corner that he ultimately didn't mind being backed into if it meant to a resolution and gaining custody of the leader responsible for the roadside bomb.

A good president swims against the current, even the fish swimming against him is his own administration.