Author Archives: Daniel Larison
About Daniel Larison
Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC, where he also keeps a solo blog. He has been published in the New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and is a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Dallas. Follow him on Twitter.
No U.S. interests are served by aiding a Saudi attack on its neighbor.
If another authoritarian state were doing what Saudi Arabia is doing to Yemen now, every Western government would be condemning it as unprovoked aggression.
The U.S. has no reason to support actions that are likely to intensify and prolong a conflict in Yemen.
There might be a temporary end to some of the usual reflexive support
Attacking Iran would just drive their nuclear program deeper underground.
Two-thirds of Floridian Republicans want him to run for re-election.
Hard-liners have redefined support to mean offering a blank check.
Our unrealistic foreign policy. Christopher Preble asks why the public should be …
Bolton’s embrace of the MEK ought to discredit his views on Iran policy.
In practice, the U.S. has shown “forbearance” by indulging Israeli governments in their worst policies.
Hawks feign concern about future proliferation while vowing to repudiate an agreement that has a good chance of preventing it.
When Boehner calls Obama an “anti-war president,” he is obviously lying.
The Democrats need to have some challengers to run against Clinton, but the focus on Warren is misplaced.
U.S. meddling in another country’s affairs backfires again.
What’s the point of a Cruz candidacy?
The more conservative candidates there are in the race, the better Bush’s chances are.
Cruz is the least likely to be able to appeal to primary voters that don’t already agree with him.
Sen. Kaine can’t bring himself to call spying by its proper name.
The costs of a “rollback” policy are always too high even for most of the advocates of “rollback.”
The latest in a long line of attempts to banish realists from Republican foreign policy debate.← Older posts
from The American Conservative