Friday, November 28, 2008

Nonsense on stills, with charts

I mean, honestly, what does it mean to be a "Hamiltonian realist" as opposed to a "Wilsonian interventionist"? And why should Ross Douthat so eagerly assent that these distinctions are meaningful vis-a-vis the foreign policy of an Obama administration that has yet to take office?

What these people desire, I would suggest, is a foreign policy that is fashionable among our "allies" -- that is to say, the defenseless European social democracies who would under no circumstance be able to offer effective military assistance to any project of mutual interest.

You want "realism" in foreign policy? Think in terms of Army divisions and naval carrier task forces.

1 comment:

  1. For me, the essential foreign policy division comes down to one question. Do we prop up tyrants out of political convenience or do we confront tyranny everywhere we find it?