Omni-directional appeasement

On the liberal (and misnamed) American Conservative magazine’s website, Daniel Larison (a longtime strident leftist libertarian whose foreign policy views are even leftier than Neville Chamberlain’s) lambastes Mitt Romney’s recent VMI speech as devoid of new content and being so belligerent that he accuses Romney of “omni-directional belligenrence.” He bases that accusation not only on  Romney’s seriousness about the option of bombing Iran and his willingness to arm Syrian rebels, but also on Romney’s views on Russia, China, and Hugo Chavez (whom Larison mentions in his screed by name, portraying him, along with Russia and China, as supposed victims of Romney’s “omni-directional belligerence”).

Larison’s screed, like the rest of what he writes, is utter garbage. But it’s predictable, coming from a leftist libertarian who has always advocated isolationism, appeasement of America’s enemies, and deep defense cuts. Other leftist libertarians writing in the American Pseudoconservative mag, such as Daniel McCarthy and Doug Bandow, have repetealy expressed similar views. But repeating blatant lies 100 times doesn’t make them true. Larison’s claims are still lies.

Romney does not advocate war with Iran; he merely says he would be willing to exercise that option if necessary. He does not advocate war with Syria, merely arming the Syrian rebels, which would allow them to topple the Assad regime by themselves and thus completely remove the need for any US or Western intervention. He does not advocate war with any foreign country.

Nor was his speech devoid of new content or his own original proposals, as his detractors claim. It laid out clearly what Mitt Romney would do: build an effetive missile defense system at home and abroad, regardless of Putin’s objections; increase pressure on Iran (while defending Israel and the Gulf states) and exercising the military option if necessary; arming the Syrian rebels to help them win their own freedom by themselves; reversing Barack Obama’s massive defense cuts; build up the Navy (his top defense advisor, former Reagan SECNAV John Lehman, has laid out specific plans to do so, revealed here); pursue many new free trade agreements; reform and condition foreign aid; call on other countries to match America’s generosity; and call on European NATO members to finally start investing at least 2% of their GDPs in defense, as agreed to by all NATO members in 2002.

You can read Romney’s whole speech here.

Larison’s pathetic screed tells us more about Larison himself than about Romney. As usual, Larison advocates an utterly ridiculous, isolationist, and pacifist foreign policy of appeasing America’s enemies – from Iran, to China, to Russia.

Iran is developing nuclear weapons, chanting “Death to America! Death to Israel!”, and threatening to wipe the Jewish state off the face of the Earth. Russia is sending bombers into and nearby US airspace to practice attacks on America, submarines near America’s coast, and threatening nuclear attacks on the US and its allies. China is conducting a  huge military buildup, stalking US carriers, threatening unarmed US ships, and threatening its neighbors Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam with aggression (and also building bases in Pakistan and Burma in preparation for aggression against India), and its general officers are openly expressing their hostility towards the US and its allies. The Syrian regime is slaughtering its own people en masse.

Yet, according to Larison and his fellow leftists, Romney is the advocate of “omni-directional belligerence.” As if Russia’s and China’s actions and threats towards the US and its allies, Iran’s threats toward Israel, and Assad’s slaughter of his own people were not belligerent at all, but rather peaceful.

It only reveals Larison’s and his fellow leftists’ liberal anti-American “Blame America First” mindset. In their warped way of thinking, America is the problem, and is always the aggressor or threat to others, while belligerent foreign powers such as Russia, China, and Iran are merely peaceful countries threatened by the US and with legitimate grievances towards Washington. In their fantasy world, there is no threat to America, except that which the US brings upon itself, and the US is always to blame in any conflict.

Such mindset is not merely liberal and leftist. It is treasonous.

No, Romney is not an advocate of “omni-directional belligerence.” But Larison and his fellow leftists, including McCarthy and Bandow, are advocates in omni-directional appeasement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s