|Filed Under:||US Politics / Conservative|
|Posts on Regator:||4834|
|Posts / Week:||16|
|Archived Since:||June 16, 2009|
If "the Union is over," it is because large numbers of voters in both England and Scotland have grown increasingly tired of the arrangement.
An attack on Iran would poison U.S.-Iranian relations for generations.
Fortunately, the hard-liners' stunts keep backfiring on them.
The dangers of not reaching a deal with Iran. Gary Sick describes …
Romney has no objections to starting an illegal war if Iran refuses to yield to demands for capitulation.
Cotton has explicitly said that he wants Congress to derail the negotiations.
Hawks are typically never judged by the results of the policies they support.
The U.S. shouldn't be interfering at all, but it certainly shouldn't be taking actions that put the local political opposition in greater difficulty.
The campaign draws attention to some of unionism's biggest weaknesses.
Paul doesn't seem to have thought through any of the implications of what Kurdish independence would mean for the countries affected by it.
Rubio may have a lot to say on foreign policy issues, but what he says is often wrong.
The party's incompetence on foreign policy comes from flawed hard-line assumptions about how the world works.
Trying to turn charges of "weakness" around on hard-liners won't advance the cause of restraint.
There is no way for a preventive war to be waged as a last resort.
Cotton and his Senate colleagues are boasting to the world that the U.S. can't be trusted to keep its commitments.
Perhaps someone should write the Senate Republicans a letter instructing them on their real constitutional responsibilities.
Senate Republican hawks are just reconfirming their lack of trustworthiness on important foreign policy issues.
Whether the sabotage "works" or not, the attempt itself is obnoxious.
We should expect basic competence from our elected leaders.
The idea that Menendez is being charged now as punishment for his opposition on the Iran deal is laughable.