Kochs Going Soft

[kalm]

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]

[YoUDeeMan]

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/

Trump wants to pull out of Japan and Korea and have them build their own nukes...OR, make them pay for us to be there.



Time for us to put our money into our peeps. Imagine if we spent our money on our own needs instead of everyone else's.

Go Trump! Go Bernie!

[UNI88]

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/

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]

Grow up, Andy. This is a serious thread.

[kalm]

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.

[Baldy]

Grow up, Andy. This is a serious thread.

You know you wish that grew in your garden. Up in the Palouse.

[Grizalltheway]

Did somebody say geoduck?

[kalm]

Did somebody say geoduck?

No.

[Grizalltheway]

Oops!

[andy7171]

[andy7171]

[UNI88]

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.

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

[Ivytalk]

That's DISGUSTING, andy!

[Ivytalk]

I guess the Kochs, like other businessmen, are just seeking a better ROI.

[kalm]

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]

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.

Are you sure that your opinion is right?

[andy7171]

[kalm]

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?

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

[clenz]

Photo I took at a pumpkin patch we took McKlenz to two years ago...

[GannonFan]

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.

Pretty broad umbrella there, don't you think? You could argue that past Presidents like Truman and TR were neocons if you hold to that wide of a definition. Heck, Wilson was pretty much a neocon too, getting us into WW1 when we had no business being there.

At some point you need to put a time fence around what you're describing. Bush II and his group, certainly neocons. Bush I and those who came before, I think conservative is just fine.

[andy7171]

http://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aNn7Aw0_460sv.mp4

[UNI88]

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?

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

[kalm]

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 ...

Objection! My opinion is irrelevant!!!

[Ivytalk]

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

Objection! My opinion is irrelevant!!!

That there is going right into my siggy!