Robert Gates is not to blame that the ban on homosexual adult leaders was not addressed years sooner, but he must answer for the current plan that seeks to devolve anti-LGBT discrimination to all of those faith-based chartered organizations that might prefer to exclude LGBT parents. This is wrong and divisive.
War is not just another policy option. It means death and destruction. It wrecks societies. It creates harms which cannot be undone. It is the most serious action that government can take. It should be a last resort, reserved for the most important interests and most moral causes. None of these is at stake in the case of Iran. Americans demanding that Washington attack Iran demonstrate that Lord Acton's axiom, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely," applies even to the United States. The mere fact that America is able to war against every nation on the planet does not justify it doing so. Washington should officially take the military option off of the table when dealing with Iran.
Chinese foreign policy displayed imagination, strategic vision and the political coherence to vastly enhance its regional dominance and global influence. While U.S. foreign policy displayed it has little to offer besides its vast military power.
With a clearer perception of the rightful concerns as promulgated in both the American and Russian experience given their proper weight, a more rational and constructive dialogue could emerge.
Thursday marks the start of RIMPAC 2014, the largest naval exercise in the world. For the first time, China is among the participants in this U.S.-organized exercise.
The city blocks of Washington, DC are chock-full of young professionals from all over the world: people in their early 20's to early 30's, often livin...
Aside from the intriguing clues to Robert Gates' probable role in constructing a false picture of the Iranian nuclear danger, Porter's book is essential reading for all Americans wary of manufactured paths to war that have become a major theme in U.S. foreign relations after World War II.
Generating a General Assembly resolution to support humanitarian relief and encouraging states to pursue humanitarian remedies at least isolates Putin and Assad from the will of the world and yields at least broad moral authority to act.
The U.S. military has been rocked by a series of scandals involving cheating, stealing, and corruption. The list of improprieties seems to get longer every day.
So what explains Obama's detachment or even apathy towards the instability and violence engulfing the region? And why is the second term president so restrained in the absence of reelection worries?
It is impossible to prove an alternative history, what would have happened had Biden's Boots Off the Ground strategy been followed. But I found that as far as can be determined, the U.S. -- and many millions of people in the Middle East -- would be much safer and better off if Biden's counsel was heeded.
At the least, Brown clearly wants to influence the politics of 2016, which prompts this discussion of his first three presidential campaigns, each of which was telling and intriguing in its own ways.
"Wars are a lot easier to get into than out of," Gates writes. Indeed! And the way to make wars much harder to get into is the requirement of an airtight premise, one worth dying for, one justifying the condolences to a dead soldier's family.
If Biden was wrong about advocating a rapid U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan (and Iraq) and Obama was wrong in adopting the Afghan escalation without believing it, then the only viable option left was evidently escalating and being excited about it.
Yes, Christie's presser was a 'tour de force performance' but was it based on implausible deniability? Clinton (Flowers) and Obama (Wright) adeptly skated by their prez campaign woes -- will Christie? Rich and Bob also debate if the Gates book helps/hurts Obama, Clinton, Biden.