printLimited government has a constitutional obligation to secure the peace by defending and protecting its constituents—not the world. Duly, and since my values are not yours and vice versa, a limited government doesn’t enforce “our values.”
POTUS is doing just that with Mr. Putin.
Hence this Breitbart article amounts to a bit of “What Aboutism.”
In “The President’s Controversial Policy Toward Russia: The Good Guys Risk Losing If the Bad Guys Are United — Part One,” the author seems to galvanize FDR and Churchill to argue—what exactly?—that Putin is a Stalin, with whom we have to make strategic common cause?
No idea.
What Aboutism should be added to the list of logical fallacies. It is not a substantive argument to say, “Oh, lookie, FDR did it too, Churchill did it too. You like them. Why not Trump?”
The other “argument” here is that China is worse than Russia, the premise being that we should do battle with the former but not the latter. In other words, the American government, a paragon of perfection, has enemies more worthy than Russia.
It might be that Synophobia is more justified than Russophobia, but the point remains that an American president should pursue not war, but peace and prosperity, albeit through mighty strength. Those are pursued through diplomacy.
UPDATE (7/30):
Wrong title. Corrected: Brilliant Russia scholar, #StephenCohen, makes Mad #MaxBoot Cry. Boot is the warmonger con who said he'd sooner vote for #Stalin than #Trump." https://t.co/85VUXzATDs https://t.co/85VUXzATDs
— ILANA Mercer (@IlanaMercer) July 31, 2018