WHEN THERE'S NO ONE LEFT TO SWIFTBOAT.Piercementioned this last week, but it deserves all the attention it can get. Kevin Tillman, U.S. Army Ranger and brother of fallen American hero Pat Tillman, joins the ranks of the shrill:
Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.
Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.
Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, is an odd place to discover the possible fate of Iraq. But the fort, a 90-year-old Army base in the midst of suburbia, plays host to the Army's communications command, which has quite a lot invested in that country's future. For the moment, the United States has 140,000 troops stationed in Iraq, where they shall remain, according to the Bush administration, until the Iraqi government can defend itself against internal subversion and mounting sectarian conflict. Having invested the lives of 2,700 troops, the health of another 20,000, and about half a trillion dollars in that effort, nobody in the United States government is willing to predict when that day will arrive.
A foreign policy for the United States should pass the basic test of advancing American interests and upholding American ideals. A foreign policy doctrine -- that is, the subordination of particular foreign-policy options to the application of a general principle -- must be such that the benefits to U.S. interests and ideals clearly overwhelm any consequences that the implementation of such a worldview entails. And a liberal foreign policy or foreign policy doctrine must meet further tests: the policy or doctrine must uphold liberal ideals; and meeting the first test must not consequently jeopardize the broader national interest in whose name liberalism seeks to act.
It took all of two days for Joe Lieberman to jettison the high-minded justifications for his post-primary campaign against Democratic Senate nominee Ned Lamont. While in his concession speech on Tuesday, Lieberman repeatedly blamed the "politics of partisan polarization" for his stunning loss to an unknown challenger, he pivoted on Thursday to touting what is actually the central rationale of his candidacy: that he, and he alone, is strong on defense. Too many people, Lieberman fretted in Waterbury, "don't appreciate the seriousness of the threat to American security" posed by jihadist terrorism.