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.
Putting Yemen “front and center” in an Iran strategy shows just how little the administration knows about Yemen and how readily they will exaggerate Iran’s role anywhere in the region.
McCain’s tired dogma. Andrew Bacevich responds to John McCain’s Liberty Medal speech. …
The routine work of maintaining relationships with other governments is allowed to fall by the wayside.
Chad’s inclusion has driven home just how arbitrary and unreasonable the policy is.
Insisting on denuclearization as the only acceptable outcome with North Korea puts the U.S. and North Korea on an unnecessary collision course that could very easily lead to war.
Americans shouldn’t have to choose between “half-baked, spurious nationalism” and the irresponsible interventionism identified with McCain.
Our government is risking harm to our relations with allies by lying about the nuclear deal.
The inclusion of Chad has illustrated just how preposterous the ban is.
Puerto Rico is at risk of suffering a major public health disaster.
If it is left up to the executive, U.S. support for the war will never end, and that is why Congress must assert itself to end our involvement.
Career department officials can be forgiven for assuming that the purpose of gutting the department has been to make it so useless that it can be ignored.
The U.S. should be trying to extricate itself from Iraq as quickly as it can.
Puerto Rico is facing a large-scale environmental crisis, and the government needs to make many more resources available as quickly as possible.
One major flaw in all of the proposals for “improving” the nuclear deal is that no one can explain why Iran would ever accept any changes.
Less than 24 hours after the eruption of fighting between Kurdish forces and the Iraqi government, we are already hearing proposals from high-profile people to throw weapons at the problem.
Obviously no deal could ever satisfy Netanyahu.
The U.S. has limited influence and may not be able to keep the situation from spiraling out of control.
McMaster might as well just declare that evidence is irrelevant to the making of administration policy.
Denouncing the JCPOA as the “21st century equivalent to Munich” is just about the crudest, most ignorant fear-mongering conceivable.
The speech confirmed that the U.S. is going to stay stuck in the same rut of fruitless antagonism with Iran for many years to come.← Older posts
from The American Conservative