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.
The U.S. shouldn’t keep its forces where they aren’t wanted, and it shouldn’t want to keep security dependents that no longer desire our presence.
David Ignatius deplores the U.S. habit of “seduction and abandonment” when it …
If more Republicans are souring on “internationalism” in foreign policy, that’s the least surprising development of all.
The nuclear deal wasn’t going to be an issue that determined many votes.
McMullin is an anti-Trump candidate whose main appeal is to Republicans that remain deeply committed to a very aggressive foreign policy.
The idea that Obama has pursued “indefatigable sponsorship of Iran” is a lazy smear that is utterly divorced from reality.
Increased U.S. meddling in the Middle East is presented to the public as if it were a necessary and unavoidable course of action when it is neither.
The election that killed foreign policy. Paul Pillar remarks on the damage …
The only thing that is international about this “centrist internationalism” seems to be that it seeks to inflict death and destruction on people in other countries.
Clinton will be coming into office with a more aggressive foreign policy agenda that has never been seriously debated.
Trump missed his last major chance to make the election more competitive.
The U.S. is perpetually at war, and some of those wars aren’t even up for debate during the process of choosing the next president.
For some reason, Rubio is judged by a very different standard
The candidates have had to answer remarkably few questions about how and why they would continue America’s entanglements in foreign conflicts.
Rubio is a senator with no significant accomplishments to his name.
The “successful” U.S. interventions in the past are severely outnumbered by the failures and disasters.
Referring to Iran as an “imperial” power is a ridiculous exaggeration.
Saudi Arabia’s senseless pursuit of war in Yemen. The Financial Times calls …
Intensifying support for the war will produce more attacks on civilian targets and more misery for the people of Yemen.
As long as Washington is eager to keep its clients satisfied, the U.S. will find itself supporting all manner of stupid and destructive policies.← Older posts
from The American Conservative