Title of his post:
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, February 27, 2013
Title of his post:
Monday, February 25, 2013
We suspend our fundraiser
Of course, if you do have that spare 10 big ones lying around...........
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
To be honest, I am intimidated by MM (Mencius not Marilyn). I start reading his offerings and they go on so long that due to laziness or an intellectual deficit, I stop. They are always intriguing and easy to start, but mea culpa, I can't keep up.
Never the less, if someone of his qualities mentions me favorably, he has my loyalty. I don't care if the next week he trashes me, The Neutralist is nothing if he is not a nepotist. So watch out.
Friday, February 15, 2013
Dennis succintly notes the fighting them over there so we won't have to fight them over there is ridiculous
But, but, these are terrorists! Maybe, but last I checked they have no navy or air force and thus cannot invade the U.S. The only reason some of them might be able to get to us is because we're letting them in.
We have been making that point since we started. Reinforcements, however, are appreciated.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
There is an alternative theory. The book, Getting to Yes apparently has not been read in Algeria. the rulers of that country fought the French and despite getting handled roughly, refused to admit defeat sufficiently that the Gauls ended up doing the admitting.
Not so long ago they fought and defeated Islamists in a bloody conflict. I know a little more than the average American about the Algeria and it's conflicts. That is to say, I know a tad north of zilch. What I do know is that these are a crew that don't roll over. US style Rodney Kingism is not their method.
So in the recent hostage event, the algerians were not interested in compromise. They were brutal and they won. I wonder if they were also sending a message to us like screw you and the Arab Spring bs.
I was pointed to this article by Malcolm Pollak. I know about as much about The American Interest as I do about Algeria. Still, it rings true and I recommend it. Mr. Garfinkle may not be a Neutralist, but the piece does not harm our beliefs.
Saturday, February 02, 2013
I commend the article "Women in Combat" by Stephen Browne. I disagree with him in some matters and he is certainly not a neutralist. His article is a concise examination of the question.
He points out women have served well in places, amongst other duties as Soviet snipers. I don't know if he is aware of the "Night Witches" an amazing group of flyers who terrorized the Wehrmacht. These lasses beat the Germans in biplanes. The Neutralist does not believe in equality, but hardly denies that the heroism and effectiveness of, as the Brits say, horses for courses.
The Neutralist sees this integration as part of the gender spoils system. As such, it will not enhance military power. A degradation will ensue.
One might say, the Neutralist would be encouraged by such a development. It can only hasten the day when the imperialist absurdity crashes. We don't. The crash due to our forces deteriorating can only be horrible.
note: I first became aware of Mr. Browne reading his article on the Saudis. Maybe his writing is a lie, but it sounds logical, if not brilliant, to me. I thank him for saving me the necessity of a trip to KSA.