President Obama is absolutely correct that our nation must confront these ruthless terrorists. But he was also correct to promise that America would not be sending U.S. combat troops back to the Middle East to fight another ground war.
Obama's war powers proposal justifies operations against vaguely defined "associated" people and entities. Put that together with the post-9/11 authorization for anti-Al Qaeda operations and you have a blank check to do pretty much anything, anywhere, any time against anyone who evinces admiration/sympathy/solidarity for Isis or Al Qaeda.
If Americans utilized the outrage over American Sniper, the Brian Williams saga, and Kanye West rushing the stage at the Grammys, and aimed this vitriol at President Obama's request for a new war, we could possibly avert yet another colossal mistake.
As was said over and over again at that moment, 9/11 "changed everything." That meant they felt themselves freed to do all the mad things we now know they did, from preemptive wars and occupations to massive programs of torture and kidnapping.
People think that Brian Williams is the problem because he exaggerated a war story about Iraq? Are you kidding me? The whole war was based on a monstrous lie that almost the entire media enabled and perpetuated. That's the real problem.
As much as both pundits on the right and left would like us to believe that this is a conflict of 'radical Islam' vs. the rest of us, it's much more complex and nuanced than that childish line of reasoning.
Whatever our opinions about specific conflicts, military men and women serve in the name of the American people - all of us. The least we can do is keep our promises to them.
In his celebrated recent book of short stories, Redeployment, Phil Klay takes the imbroglio that was the Iraq War and turns it into the pulsing sum of very individual experiences.
The controversy over the film American Sniper has raised issues of Iraq War veterans and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in the public eye. A n...
The specter of the Islamic State has silenced congressional criticism and marginalized anti-war voices on the outside. The looming question is whether an open-ended authorization will extend the war on terror for years to come. The most critical issues are these.
he president likes to talk a good game. He continues to propose these new plans that he claims will strengthen the American economy, reduce our debt and give the middle class a boost. But what he fails to do is consider the fiscal consequences these plans carry.
Thirteen years after our set of disastrous wars started, where is the massive antiwar movement, including an army in near revolt and a Congress with significant critics in significant positions?
In Washington this week, pro-American Sunni leaders of Iraq's Western Anbar province asked the Obama Administration for weapons and 10,000 US troops to help "crush" Islamist terrorists -- again.
It was August 2, 1990, and Saddam Hussein, formerly Washington's man in Baghdad and its ally against fundamentalist Iran, had just sent his troops across the border into oil-rich Kuwait. It would prove a turning point in American Middle East policy.
Pentagon insiders called it "the long war," an open-ended, perhaps unending, conflict against nations and terror networks mainly of a radical Islamist bent. Over the years, its chief characteristic became ever clearer: a Groundhog Day kind of repetition.
The Road to Iraq is a work of tremendous intellectual diligence and moral seriousness.