Hawks’ gall.
I’m not really a foreign policy guy, but I thought Daniel Larison had a nice line on hawkishness today:
“Hawks have routinely unleashed forces they do not understand, cannot control and are unwilling to contain, and they still have the gall to shout ‘Appeasement!’ when someone else tries to repair some small measure of the damage they have done.”
This comes in the context of a post on the conservative reaction to Obama’s foreign policy so far.
Sadly, most of what passes for conservative commentary on foreign affairs sounds like it is based entirely on hazy memories of falling asleep to a history channel documentary on the beginnings of ww2.Report
And another nice line!
There’s a bad filtering effect, where the arguments of hawks who kind of know what they are talking about are stripped of detail and then amplified by hawks who don’t care to be careful.Report
Referring to Obama’s UN speech, he called for a two state solution and one in which the Palestinian areas are contiguous. Not even the original treaty called for the Palestinian areas to be contiguous. He is making foreign policy up out of whole cloth. Is he calling for a corridor to connect Gaza and the West Bank? How wide will it be and where will it be located? Will the Israelis accept it? Can you see that this might be a problem for American-Israeli relations?
I read an editorial in an Indian paper. It called Obama the worst president for India since Nixon. That is not bad for less than a year in office. Starting a trade war with China is another bad idea. If he continues, Hillary is going to have her hands full. These are some examples of the problems he is creating for America. You do not have to be an Obama hater to realize that he is alienating people who once supported him.Report