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.
When Congress should assert itself and when it shouldn’t. Paul Pillar compares …
The fixation on Warren as the hoped-for progressive challenger to Clinton underscores how few prominent elected doves there are in the Democratic Party today.
Neither party has much incentive to tone down its attacks on the other over foreign policy and national security.
Paul’s speech was an improvement over previous efforts, but he left too many questions unanswered.
The main difficulty for Paul tonight will be to square his larger argument for foreign policy restraint with his support for the current war against ISIS.
A large majority of Americans doesn’t think the war has a clear goal.
The complaint that early voters won’t be as well-informed as later voters is not persuasive.
There is less British support for withdrawing from the EU now than there was a few years ago for reasons that have nothing to do with UKIP.
Romney’s failing wasn’t that he was too vague on foreign policy, but that he demonstrated how little he knew by making detailed criticisms that made no sense.
Future Republican candidates would be foolish to listen to Romney foreign policy advisers.
In light of this latest embarrassment, Poland is definitely better off being represented abroad by someone else.
The impulse to meddle in the affairs of other nations “for their own good” is not limited to just one party or foreign policy tradition.
Endorsing a British exit from the EU won’t give the Tories a landslide.
If the GOP falls short of taking control of the Senate next month, the result will be explained away as a fluke.
The 2014 election is shaping up to be an election mostly about nothing.
Hawks need Obama to be some hybrid holdover from the 1970s, because they are still arguing with their old opponents from forty years ago.
Resuming full economic and diplomatic relations with one of our closest neighbors is not a reward to the country’s government.
We should be wary of anyone that attempts to explain the behavior of states with claims about what entire nations are “hard-wired” to do.
Allying with Assad and Iran against the Islamic State would be both abhorrent and unworkable.
The secret casualties of Iraq’s chemical weapons. C.J. Chivers reports on the …← Older posts
from The American Conservative