A plucky new think tank takes the fight to the foreign policy ‘blob’ and promotes policies of retrenchment, realism, and restraint.
Calls from hawks like John Bolton and others in the military for more intervention are bad for Trump’s reelection chances and even worse for the United States.
When was the last time you heard a U.S. president express hesitancy and moral qualms about the loss of innocent lives through our military interventions? Probably never.
It appears President Trump is cognizant of the slow drift to war with Iran, and is not very happy about it. Someone needs to remind him who is the president.
If Washington isn’t careful, we could be a single miscalculation away from a war that would be wholly unjustified and unnecessary to U.S. security.
If mixed messaging in foreign policy is a concern, so is the tendency of Trump’s critics inside and outside the media to create public confusion over the administration’s intent regarding Iran.
While he has yet to fulfill this instinct in his foreign policy choices, Donald Trump is still more attuned to a non-interventionist America than is his prospective rival Joe Biden.
In Venezuela, cautious realism is needed instead of military intervention, which would inevitably lead to another costly nation-building endeavor.
The only strategic interest the West has in Libya is a restoration of order and stability. Conservatives should again resist the urge to intervene in Libya.
Rather than preserving an indefinite presence that lets the region’s leaders off the hook at the expense of other priorities, the United States must bring our troops home.
Gabbard threatens the status quo and the never-ending war mentality that enriches the coffers of powerful interests. That’s exactly why she should be heard.
Neocons have lost the GOP base due to their mishandling of the United States’ foreign wars, and Trump’s presidency is only just the beginning of a necessary shift.
The United States cannot save the world by opening our borders. Its ills are too great and numerous.
Were U.S. forces not already deployed to Syria, no sane person would recommend sending in 400 U.S. troops into a complex, dangerous civil war with multiple armed actors on the ground.
U.S. troops will reportedly leave eastern Syria by April, causing heart palpitations among the usual suspects who have never seen a U.S. intervention they wanted to end.
American men and women are still being sent to far-off lands, under-trained and under-equipped, to fight in conflicts that have little congressional oversight and little payoff for U.S. strategy.
By a 68-23 margin, the Senate decided we haven’t spilled enough blood, broken enough soldiers, or spent enough money on Afghanistan.
These failed pundits’ efforts are meant to shame President Trump into reversing his instinct to pull the United States out of Afghanistan.
Venezuela’s situation is terrible, and Nicolas Maduro’s stronghold might grow less stable over the course of the month. We still shouldn’t intervene.
- My Son’s Freshman Orientation At Virginia Tech Was Full Of Leftist PropagandaNow that I have witnessed college propaganda firsthand,continue reading >
- The New York Times Is Clueless About ConservativesA recently released transcript shows just how biased thcontinue reading >
- How Sarah Silverman Could Have Avoided Cancel CultureWhat makes this incident ridiculous is that Sarah Silvecontinue reading >