Category Archives: Neoconservatism

Flying Sorties For Peace (The Latest From Libya)

Democracy, Foreign Policy, Islam, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Middle East, Neoconservatism, War

Make no mistake, and Obama’s denials notwithstanding, “Rebels fighting their way towards the Libyan capital” are “backed by Nato aircraft [ostensibly enforcing a UN resolution to protect civilians from Col Gaddafi’s forces.”]

NATO=The US. And the US being the US (a warrior nation); it is not pressing for peace talks, even though Libyan officials have “urged the rebels to open talks. ‘If you want peace, we are ready,’ Information Minister Moussa Ibrahim has said.

Rather than encourage a peaceful solution to the Libyan conflict from which democracy (as bad as that is) is unlikely to spring, our English allies—A UK Foreign Office spokesman, in particular, who appears to have responded on behalf of the oh-so independent Libyan Rebels—promised that “Nato action will continue … Our overriding priority has always been to protect Libyan civilians and to enable them to choose their own future.”

By flying sorties over their homes?

In July, Mrs Clinton, a member of the President’s Womb Warrior team, announced that, “Until an interim authority is in place, the United States will recognise the TNC [Transitional National Council] as the legitimate governing authority for Libya, and we will deal with it on that basis. … The United States views the Gaddafi regime as no longer having any legitimate authority in Libya,” Mrs Clinton had said.

As the BBC observed, by recognizing the Libyan opposition as the country’s “legitimate governing authority,” the US ensured that “billions of dollars of Libyan assets frozen in US banks could be released to the rebels.”

Have you ever wondered to whom this US confiscated (oops, “frozen”) property belonged in the first place? One loses track of all the “good” things America does in the name of freedom.

Counterfeiter In Chief in the Crosshairs

Debt, Economy, Federal Reserve Bank, Inflation, Neoconservatism

More and more in mainstreams are finding fault with the US’s counterfeiter-in-chief, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Jeffrey Bell’s point is mild and purely utilitarian:

To maintain interest rates at zero, the Fed prints endless amounts of dollars, driving down the dollar’s value. In the short run, this props up the bond and stock markets, enabling big banks and big business to thrive. But the absence of interest rates is suppressing the lines of credit that enable small business to expand by a factor of two thirds, according to Stanford economist Ronald McKinnon. And in the U.S., small business is responsible for most new jobs.
So unless this printing of dollars is halted, we’re doomed to continued high unemployment. Gov. Perry should be commended for starting a debate that’s long overdue.

But at least he’s not fussing childishly about the Perry Fed statement, which, according to neoconservative Andrew Sullivan, “disqualifies Perry from the race.” The author of the Daily Dish is furious that “the integrity of a civil servant” has been impugned:

If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I dunno what y’all would do to him in Iowa but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treasonous in my opinion.

UPDATED: McCain: Serial Killer By Proxy

Foreign Policy, John McCain, Neoconservatism, War

McCain was interviewed on Fox News practically pleading with Barack Obama to bring the matter of war in Libya to Congress. Why do you suppose McCain is craving congressional approval for America’s latest losing war? McMussolini’s just an old-fashioned neocon. He can’t wait for BHO to legitimize a war he’d like to take to the next level. (I’d provide a link if Fox New believed in the written word.)

George Will let’s McCain off lightly. He dubs him a “promiscuous interventionist”—rather than a serial killer by proxy.

Will has taken a long time to wake up. But better late than never: “Elevating the fallacy of the false alternative to a foreign policy, John McCain and a few others believe Republicans who oppose U.S. intervention in Libya’s civil war — and who think a decade of warfare in Afghanistan is enough — are isolationists. This is less a thought than a flight from thinking, which involves making sensible distinctions.

Last Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” McCain warned that the GOP has always had “an isolation strain.” He calls it “the Pat Buchanan wing,” which he contrasts with “the Republican Party that has been willing to stand up for freedom for people all over the world. …Is Jim Webb an isolationist? Virginia’s Democratic senator, who was Ronald Reagan’s secretary of the Navy, discusses Libya with a trenchancy that befits a decorated Marine combat veteran (Vietnam) and that should shame reticent Republicans:

“Was our country under attack, or under the threat of imminent attack? Was a clearly vital national interest at stake? Were we invoking the inherent right of self-defense as outlined in the United Nations charter? Were we called upon by treaty commitments to come to the aid of an ally? Were we responding in kind to an attack on our forces elsewhere, as we did in the 1986 raids in Libya after American soldiers had been killed in a disco in Berlin? Were we rescuing Americans in distress, as we did in Grenada in 1983? No, we were not.”

McCain, however, says we must achieve regime change in Libya because if Gaddafi survives, he will try to “harm” America. This is always the last argument for pressing on with imprudent interventions (see Vietnam, circa 1969): We must continue fighting because we started fighting.

UPDATE (June 23): Here is the McCain interview with Hannity. He also said that bringing the troops home from Afghanistan will put them at risk. You can see where Meghaaaann gets her brains.

Afghan GDP Equals US Military Spending There

Drug War, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Military, Neoconservatism, War, Welfare

Belatedly, and after spilling much blood and treasure for nothing at all in Afghanistan, mainstream opinion makers have concluded what we non-interventionists concluded a decade ago. Making Afghans (and Iraqis) wards of the American state will increase their impotence (to say nothing of violating their negative, leave-me-alone rights and ours, as we’ve paid for the adventure in lost lives and livelihoods). “Ultimately, philanthropic wars are transfer programs—the quintessential big-government projects.”

A “two-year congressional investigation from Senate Democrats” gives details of the defeat. Via the National Journal:

“World Bank data estimates that 97 percent of Afghanistan’s gross domestic product comes from spending related to the military and donor community presence, according the report, which warns that a withdrawal could pull the rug out from under the Afghan economy.” …

MORE…

I suspect that slashing and burning the Afghans’ poppy fields hasn’t helped them either. “In a country with a poor infrastructure, the ‘relatively stable value of opium and its nonperishability means that it can also serve as an important source of savings and investment among traders and cultivators.'” (From “Tokers Are Terrorists Now”)