Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Old Rightists on the War on Libya

  • Patrick J. Buchanan asks, "If regime change is now the unstated NATO mission, who but the United States can ensure the mission is accomplished?" — Are We Allied to a Corpse? A more fundamental question: "What benefit does America receive from membership in NATO, to justify the cost of maintaining tens of thousands of troops, air and naval bases, ships, and planes defending a rich and populous continent that chronically refuses to provide the arms and men to defend itself?"

  • "The Libyan war seems almost unique in its mix of frivolous decision-making, confused objectives, minimal benefits, and bungled execution," says Doug Bandow, an example of "why war should be a last rather than first resort" — West Exacerbates Libyans' Suffering.

  • Anthony Gregory reminds us that "Clinton and Obama have both revealed themselves to be as bloodthirsty as the Bushes before them" — From Waco to Libya: 18 Years of Humanitarian Mass Murder.

    Labels: , , , , , ,

  • Bookmark and Share


    Blogger Mark in Spokane said...

    The more time goes by, the greater the wisdom of Washington & Hamilton's foreign policy, on display in Washington's Farewell Address, becomes more and more manifest. The foreign policy of reckless foreign adventurism, first manifested by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, is demonstrated to be not only harmful but mad.

    2:32 PM  
    Blogger The Western Confucian said...

    Agreed about Washington's Farewell Address, which sounds a lot like jefferson's Inaugural Address: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none."

    Walter Russell Meade would disagree about Hamiltonianism:

    "Hamiltonian doctrine is really the doctrine that pushes the economic primacy of the United States. Hamiltonians believe that a fundamental link between the government and big business is key to the survival and success of the country. They are, however, realists who believe that the US is at best primus inter pares among other nations. As a result, they believe that the US is best served by international organizations that protect fundamentally American interests. If you're looking for Hamiltonian legacies, look at things like the IMF, World Bank, NAFTA, and the WTO. Hamiltonians believe that the US should be integrated into the global economy on the most favorable terms possible, and that this above all else drives the success of the American system. Well known Hamiltonians include George H. W. Bush, Henry Cabot Lodge, and Bill Clinton.

    "One common misconception to be ware of is that Hamiltonian thinkers are essentially identical to the realpolitik-driven upper crust of European society. While the socialization is superficially the same, the results on this side of the Atlantic are quite different. In the common European view, national interest was most often viewed in terms of a military balance of power. In the Anglo-American Hamiltonian view, however, national interest is best served by preventing the rise of a single hostile power able to unify the opposition, while strong expeditionary forces and a similarly-strong international trading environment are used to provide the muscle of the nation's defense."


    7:14 PM  
    Blogger Mark in Spokane said...

    McDonald, Chernow, Rossiter and Brookhiser would all disagree. While Hamilton favored a more interventionist state than Jefferson did, Hamilton's idea of government support for business is a far cry from today's crony capitalism.

    I've got a post over at my own blog right now on Hamilton's conservative credentials. While certainly not a modern Tea Partier, Hamilton is no modern liberal either.

    As for Jefferson's address, like virtually everything else he touched on, Jefferson wrote one thing and then did the other. He didn't believe a word of his own rhetoric...

    2:17 AM  

    Post a Comment

    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home

    Omnes Sancti et Sanctæ Coreæ, orate pro nobis.