Why The Neutralist? The term Isolationist implies a narrow Fortress America outlook and is used as an epithet. The term Neutralist does not indicate someone hiding out from the world. No one calls the Swiss isolationists. The Wilsonian world view is old, tired and wrong. Our interventions have been less and less successful and now the failure can no longer be covered up.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Though the Neutralist does not know the exact details, just the broad outline, it is enough to expound on. There is an Irish saying we heard from the late academic, John Roche, we feel applies here, Never get involved in the religious wars of churches you don't belong to.
Now we have to trust the Paddy on this one. People who have had their share of intra-national religious battles should know enough to walk on by when they see, say, a Jain and an animist arguing theology.
I don't mean to make light of the man's end, but he trod where he could only know so much of struggle that he stepped in. So it is with our involvement in all the squabbles we have made our own and most recently Libya. We at the Neutralist offer up a Kool Aid Free Zone.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Wishing That Heroes, They Truly Exist
Saturday, April 2nd, 2011
“Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.”
–Britney Spears, in 2003, commenting on the war in Iraq.
“But the reason I voted for Obama in 2008 is because I trust his judgment. And not in any merely abstract way, either: I mean that if he and I were in a room and disagreed about some issue on which I had any doubt at all, I’d literally trust his judgment over my own. I think he’s smarter than me, better informed, better able to understand the consequences of his actions, and more farsighted. I voted for him because I trust him, and I still do.”
– Mother Jones blogger Kevin Drum, in 2011, on Obama’s war in Libya.
(Hat tip: Jeromee P. Snash.)
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
What About Defense Spending?
Can we really be serious about tackling the deficit while doing nothing about defense spending? I think not, and Ryan wimps out big time by failing to address it.
The United States spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined. We have troops in 140 countries. Yet, the simple fact of the matter is the US can no longer afford to be the world's policeman.
If other countries want our troops, perhaps they should pay us. However, it would be better yet if we would simply leave on our own accord.
As long as we are packing our bags, we should pack up and leave Iraq and Afghanistan. It's time to declare the wars are won and leave.
If we do that, and pull some troops home, it should be an easy matter to cut $200 billion a year out of the defense budget. That would save $2 trillion over 10 years. Actually I think we should cut far more, but I am hoping to come up with a number that has a chance.
Thanks, Mish. It is to the point and not arguable by anyone sane.
It's lonely being the neutralist, but sometimes someone else says the right thing and we feel better.
Friday, April 01, 2011
“He told me they have accepted they will all probably die from radiation sickness in the short term or cancer in the long-term.”
Maybe this gives us a glimpse as to what it meant to sacrifice one's life on the deck of a carrier. A nation that produces such sons deserves to live.
Let us not equivocate. My relatives were in the Pacific. Japan treatment of POWs was not glorious. The courage in the face of such odds was and is.