|Filed Under:||US Politics / Conservative|
|Posts on Regator:||3852|
|Posts / Week:||12.6|
|Archived Since:||June 16, 2009|
The importance of the Iran agreement. Paul Pillar identifies four aspects of …
The military intervention is throwing the country deeper into disorder and chaos.
The U.S. is backing the same destabilizing and aggressive behavior in Yemen it claims to oppose elsewhere.
It makes for a good fear-mongering soundbite, but on closer scrutiny the argument falls apart.
Our allies aren't interested in pursuing our Iran hawks' impossible goals at their expense.
Our officials are recycling preposterous propaganda lines to defend the indefensible.
Starting a war with Iran will last longer and cost more than anyone anticipates.
This does nothing to make the U.S. more secure, but it does make our government one of the authors of the ruin of another country.
The consequences of the Saudi war are already very serious.
Paul's foreign policy rhetoric was combative enough to be off-putting to antiwar conservatives and libertarians.
Refusing to resolve one issue because it doesn't magically solve all other problems is a mindless approach to foreign policy.
The focused attacks on Paul show there was no point in trying to placate hard-liners.
If we wanted to embitter another generation of Iranians against our government, we would do exactly as Perry wished.
It's not possible to start a war as a last resort.
If the goal is to win the nomination, appealing to one faction to the exclusion of everyone else isn't going to succeed.
It's wrong to say that the Iran framework agreement puts "daylight" between the U.S. and its allies.
Iran hawks set absurdly high expectations for what negotiations should be able to do and what they should include.
By raising Lazarus from the dead before Thy passion, Thou didst confirm …
Saudi Arabia’s coming quagmire. Peter Salisbury explains the background to the current …
The war on Yemen is already backfiring and harming regional security.