Differing perspectives on Iran from two intellectual juggernauts of conservatism:
Charles Krauthammer provides the more hawkish, "neoconservative" position.
Pat Buchanan endorses a hands-off, isolationist approach. He offered another defense of this position today.
Which seems best to you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Why is a hands off approach always called "isolationist" by most conservatives? PB isn't advocating isolation, just not meddling in other countries' business. Retard conservative commentators said the same thing about Ron Paul during the debates. He wasn't isolationist.
ReplyDeleteAlso Pat Buchanan is right because he is the greatest human ever.
What's your definition of isolation, if it isn't "not meddling in other countries' business"? Actually, I agree that Buchanan and Paul aren't pure isolationists, because in the modern world true isolationist government is impossible. I'm just using the term in the common political sense. In the parlance of our times, dude.
ReplyDeleteI would say that North Korea is isolationist. The people there have no contact with the outside world. People like Ron Paul want a hands off approach to other countries' political squabbles, but they still want trading relations with them. That isn't isolationism to me...its Handsoffexceptfortradingism.
ReplyDeleteI would go further and say we don't want to trade with Iran or Cuba or NKorea because we don't want to support those countries.