Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

IN THE LATEST example of how foreign policy no longer neatly aligns with party politics, the Charles Koch Institute — the think tank founded and funded by energy billionaire Charles Koch — hosted an all-day event Wednesday featuring a set of speakers you would be more likely to associate with a left-wing anti-war rally than a gathering hosted by a longtime right-wing institution.

At the event, titled “Advancing American Security: The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy,” prominent realist and liberal foreign policy scholars took turns trashing the neoconservative worldview that has dominated the foreign policy thinking of the Republican Party — which the Koch brothers have been allied with for decades.

Most of the speakers assailed the Iraq War, nation building, and regime change. During a panel event also featuring former Obama Pentagon official Kathleen Hicks, foreign policy scholar John Mearsheimer brought the crowd to applause by denouncing American military overreach....

Mearshiemer, Walt, and Freeman are particularly despised by neocons, and not simply for their starkly different policy prescriptions. Walt and Mearsheimer’s 2006 book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy was critical of the U.S.-Israel relationship, arguing that it was overly influenced by domestic interest groups. Freeman’s nomination to an intelligence post in the Obama White House was derailed by behind-the-scenes accusations that he wasn’t sufficiently pro-Israel.

kalm wrote:On foreign policy and maybe Israel. Hmmm........

IN THE LATEST example of how foreign policy no longer neatly aligns with party politics, the Charles Koch Institute — the think tank founded and funded by energy billionaire Charles Koch — hosted an all-day event Wednesday featuring a set of speakers you would be more likely to associate with a left-wing anti-war rally than a gathering hosted by a longtime right-wing institution.

At the event, titled “Advancing American Security: The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy,” prominent realist and liberal foreign policy scholars took turns trashing the neoconservative worldview that has dominated the foreign policy thinking of the Republican Party — which the Koch brothers have been allied with for decades.

Most of the speakers assailed the Iraq War, nation building, and regime change. During a panel event also featuring former Obama Pentagon official Kathleen Hicks, foreign policy scholar John Mearsheimer brought the crowd to applause by denouncing American military overreach....

Mearshiemer, Walt, and Freeman are particularly despised by neocons, and not simply for their starkly different policy prescriptions. Walt and Mearsheimer’s 2006 book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy was critical of the U.S.-Israel relationship, arguing that it was overly influenced by domestic interest groups. Freeman’s nomination to an intelligence post in the Obama White House was derailed by behind-the-scenes accusations that he wasn’t sufficiently pro-Israel.

https://theintercept.com/2016/05/18/neo ... continues/

kalm wrote:On foreign policy and maybe Israel. Hmmm........

IN THE LATEST example of how foreign policy no longer neatly aligns with party politics, the Charles Koch Institute — the think tank founded and funded by energy billionaire Charles Koch — hosted an all-day event Wednesday featuring a set of speakers you would be more likely to associate with a left-wing anti-war rally than a gathering hosted by a longtime right-wing institution.

At the event, titled “Advancing American Security: The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy,” prominent realist and liberal foreign policy scholars took turns trashing the neoconservative worldview that has dominated the foreign policy thinking of the Republican Party — which the Koch brothers have been allied with for decades.

Most of the speakers assailed the Iraq War, nation building, and regime change. During a panel event also featuring former Obama Pentagon official Kathleen Hicks, foreign policy scholar John Mearsheimer brought the crowd to applause by denouncing American military overreach....

Mearshiemer, Walt, and Freeman are particularly despised by neocons, and not simply for their starkly different policy prescriptions. Walt and Mearsheimer’s 2006 book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy was critical of the U.S.-Israel relationship, arguing that it was overly influenced by domestic interest groups. Freeman’s nomination to an intelligence post in the Obama White House was derailed by behind-the-scenes accusations that he wasn’t sufficiently pro-Israel.

https://theintercept.com/2016/05/18/neo ... continues/

andy7171 wrote:

UNI88 wrote:

kalm wrote:On foreign policy and maybe Israel. Hmmm........



https://theintercept.com/2016/05/18/neo ... continues/

I agree with this for the most part but the bolded is a little exaggerated. Dubya was a neocon but his father, Reagan and Ford weren't.

kalm wrote:

andy7171 wrote:

Grow up, Andy. This is a serious thread.

Grizalltheway wrote:Did somebody say geoduck?

kalm wrote:

UNI88 wrote:
I agree with this for the most part but the bolded is a little exaggerated. Dubya was a neocon but his father, Reagan and Ford weren't.

andy7171 wrote:

UNI88 wrote:

kalm wrote:

Proof that I'm wrong?

I'm going to guess that you'll argue about Reagan so here's some food for thought ...
http://www.cato.org/publications/commen ... -no-neocon

kalm wrote:

UNI88 wrote:
Proof that I'm wrong?

I'm going to guess that you'll argue about Reagan so here's some food for thought ...
http://www.cato.org/publications/commen ... -no-neocon

So Reagan was a passive-aggressive foreign interventionist. And no mention of playing both sides of the Iran-Iraq war either. Not a good argument at all.

ne·o·con·serv·a·tive
ˌnēōkənˈsərvədiv/
adjective
adjective: neo-conservative
1.
relating to or denoting a return to a modified form of a traditional viewpoint, in particular a political ideology characterized by an emphasis on free-market capitalism and an interventionist foreign policy.

UNI88 wrote:

kalm wrote:
So Reagan was a passive-aggressive foreign interventionist. And no mention of playing both sides of the Iran-Iraq war either. Not a good argument at all.

ne·o·con·serv·a·tive
ˌnēōkənˈsərvədiv/
adjective
adjective: neo-conservative
1.
relating to or denoting a return to a modified form of a traditional viewpoint, in particular a political ideology characterized by an emphasis on free-market capitalism and an interventionist foreign policy.

Are you sure that your opinion is right?

kalm wrote:

UNI88 wrote:
Proof that I'm wrong?

I'm going to guess that you'll argue about Reagan so here's some food for thought ...
http://www.cato.org/publications/commen ... -no-neocon

So Reagan was a passive-aggressive foreign interventionist. And no mention of playing both sides of the Iran-Iraq war either. Not a good argument at all.

ne·o·con·serv·a·tive
ˌnēōkənˈsərvədiv/
adjective
adjective: neo-conservative
1.
relating to or denoting a return to a modified form of a traditional viewpoint, in particular a political ideology characterized by an emphasis on free-market capitalism and an interventionist foreign policy.

kalm wrote:

UNI88 wrote:
Are you sure that your opinion is right?

Was Reagan a foreign interventionist? Was Bush 1 opposed to Reagan's policies? Did Bush 1 invade Iraq?

UNI88 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Was Reagan a foreign interventionist? Was Bush 1 opposed to Reagan's policies? Did Bush 1 invade Iraq?

Your Honor, please direct the witness to answer the question ...

kalm wrote:

UNI88 wrote:
Your Honor, please direct the witness to answer the question ...

Objection! My opinion is irrelevant!!!