Experience Endorsing Bad Ideas
Yesterday I attend the foreign policy panel at CAP-Action Fund yesterday for their McCain University. (A bunch of wonks talking trashing about John McCain) 
It was pretty good discussion over all, but one point brought up in the introduction was that McCain is more of a Neo-Conservative then George W. Bush. In fact, unlike Bush, he probably was a Neo-Conservative before 9-11. I think this is one of the major things missing for the mainstream discussion about John McCain’s alleged expertise in National Security.
Unlike Liberal internationalism, Realism, Neo-Conservativism is intrinsically linked to the belief that we need to start bombing lots of people ASAP. Being a realist on foreign policy doesn’t necessarily mean you think bombing Serbia in the nineties was right, or that negotiations with N. Korea over nukes were wrong, and neither does being an internationalist mean you think the opposite. Internationalism and Realism are methods of evaluating the reasons and likely successful outcomes to our actions. Realism doesn’t reject diplomacy, and Internationalism doesn’t reject the use of force.
By contrast Neoconservatives, while not rejecting diplomacy per se, basically views the world as a list of places to bomb. If you don’t have at least a short list of country we should have intervened in then you’re not a Neoconservative. Typically Neoconservatives have quite the long list of countries we should have bombed or invaded.
John McCain has indicated he would have started a war with N. Korea in the 90s. Neoconservative authors identified more then a dozen countries were they would intervened in the nineties. Basically with McCain the question wouldn’t be if we use force, but rather which countries come first. Iran’s lack of a nuclear weapons program to bomb hasn’t stopped John Bolton from advocating bombing them. Syria would presumably be next on the list, but there are place that might bubble up to the front of line. And we’d ramp up rhetorical hostilities with China and Russia while we’re at it.
In short John McCain’s experience isn’t relevant to his judgment on national security because we know to a large extent what decisions he would make. And he’s already indicated he’d make extremely dangerous, idiotic, crazy decisions.
Filed under: Politics | 4 Comments
Tags: Foreign Policy, John McCain, Iran, Bomb Iran, Neoconservative, North Korea, Center For American Progress Action Fund, McCain University
-
Recent Comments
Blogroll
I always bomb people I meet… it’s a great way to make friends and it always gives you something to talk about.
When there aren’t any people around to meet I take to bombing people far away, this too is a great way to make friends.
thinking about it, bombing people is the best thing that’s ever been invented – it solves so many problems with virtually no consequences… plus it helps the lovely people in the arms industry make a little bit more money.
Sorry, i haven’t had my coffee yet and subtly is not my nature this early on.
Why is John McCain riding a humongous penis that says “Iran” on it?
Because McCain wants to drop penises on Iran
That sounds like one of Pat Robertson’s ideas: drop penises on ‘em, turn the whole place into a modern-day Soddom and Gommorrah, then God will take care of them by sending a couple Hurricane Katrinas their way, just like he did to those pagans in New Orleans. I must say, I do enjoy your satirical drawing Callaninno, even though I poke fun at its somewhat phallic nature. As a Ron Paul supporter, I must note that Congressman Paul would never drop bombs or penises on anyone unless it was absolutely necessary.