To Americans tired of military campaigns to social engineer governments in distant lands, Donald Trump suggested he might embrace a less belligerent foreign policy. That’s not happening.
You may have never heard of Robert Kagan or Max Boot, but they are hugely influential to the people you vote for.
Speakers from both parties, including early and vociferous opponents of President Trump, trashed the deal while urging the president to take a harder line on Iran.
The idea that Russia orchestrated the Trump administration’s decision to end the CIA’s funding of jihadists is totally corrupt and offensive.
The GOP has struggled to define its foreign policy views, waffling between neoconservatism and anti-interventionism. But we need a third way.
If Trump’s shock presidential win taught us anything, it should be that the United States cannot be so stretched protecting others that it hurts its own citizens.
If a few tear-jerker images can move President Trump (or anyone) to support a war that he always opposed, we’re in bad shape indeed.
Bill Kristol need not bend his knee nor kiss the ring of the power. He’s playing hardball and making people angry, but then again, so is the president.
His comments since Inauguration Day have disintegrated into a pettiness unbefitting a man of Bill Kristol’s intellectual heft and influence.
When asked if America’s foreign policy since 9/11 has made us more or less safe, a non-dangling-chad majority (51 percent) said ‘less safe.’
A conservative approach toward the Middle East today should not be a choice between the two extremes of isolationism or global policing.
Liberal interventionism and neoconservatism offer us the same militaristic approaches. It’s time for a new, more thoughtful approach to our foreign policy.
‘If I have been focused on an establishment, it has been the monolithic one in Middle Eastern Studies, not the varied one in Washington. There you at least get some turnover.’
Peering through the murk, what we see in our current political memes about globalism is a noisy celebration of half-truths and half-baked ideas.
Both George W. Bush and Barack Obama’s foreign policies can be seen as classic examples of idealism overpowering cold analysis of facts.
Nearly all of the U.S foreign policy establishment is now aligned with the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party. That’s not surprising.
Donald Trump’s foreign policy program reminds us that many people are enthusiastic about contradictory nonsense when it seems to break through a persistent impasse.
People who love freedom in its various forms still need to work together to fight for it in the political arena. So we should start considering ways a new coalition can avoid old mistakes.
- The Conventional Wisdom About Millennial Suffering Is A MythDespite a sense of unearned victimhood, millennials havcontinue reading >
- Obama-Era State Department Official Provides More Evidence Of FISA AbuseKathleen Kavalec’s notes provide at least four more pcontinue reading >
- 15 Best Memes About The ‘Game Of Thrones’ FinaleRegardless of how the series ended, you knew the Interncontinue reading >