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.
Hawks insist on an impossible goal and then condemn the significant progress that was achieved through compromise.
The Saudis and their allies are starving the country to death with the support of our government.
The GOP is on the wrong side of public opinion on the deal.
Huckabee is accusing the administration and supporters of the nuclear deal of abetting a future genocide.
Voters should understand that candidates that promote the “martyr-state” myth are seeking to deceive them.
Faith in diplomacy. Gracy Olmstead reviews the career and foreign policy views …
Walker has a fanciful view of how alliance management works.
Republicans shouldn’t want 2016 to be an election with a heavy emphasis on foreign policy issues.
Iran hawks are most confident about Iran’s “march of conquest” when it isn’t happening, and they were heedless of Iranian gains when they were most likely to occur.
Most Iranian dissidents welcome the deal.
These are the horrific consequences of ill-conceived and reckless military intervention.
Romney’s op-ed is also a reminder of the shoddy, half-baked foreign policy arguments that he made as a candidate.
Paul is endorsing preventive–and therefore unnecessary–war as an acceptable and appropriate policy.
Friedman is still intent on making preventive war seem acceptable.
Today starting at 2:00 Eastern I’ll be taking questions on TAC‘s Facebook …
Support for normalization and ending the embargo has increased since the start of the year.
The candidates should have more incentives to break with party orthodoxy more often in such a large field, but the opposite has been happening.
Roughly two-fifths of Republicans across the country back the agreement.
This does not have the makings of a “constitutional crisis.”
Iran hawks are suddenly indifferent to the preferences of the opposition and the people that they otherwise use as props when it serves their argument.← Older posts
from The American Conservative