How Obama suckered the Anti-Warists

Or to put it another way - the way that it's written: "How Obama rebranded the war on terror".

Basically it complains that he's using Newspeak to describe the same foreign policy that Bush supported.


The only problem is it then goes on to remind us of how dangerous our enemies are, and implicitly tells us how wonderful it is that we're over there spreading the goodness of democracy and depleted uranium.

It's not that the Taliban are, oh, just wonderful people or something. It's not that Sharia law is right or that the opression in Muslim countries is right. In fact, it's not even that all of the premises for the neocon agenda are wrong. It's just one premise that never gets discussed but is fundamentally flawed: that individual nations can act as the police of the world. No, they can't, not in the past, not now, and not in the future. Nobody can police the whole world, for granting such a concentration of power to such a small group of people is the antithesis of liberty; this is why non-interventionist foreign policy is so important. Because no matter how well meaning your foreign invasions are, in the end you will be treated as an occupying force.

Just apply a little bit of empathy: what if America or Britain was invaded by (let's say for argument's sake) the Chinese? They brought with them democracy, so long as you voted for certain approved candidates; they built huge military installations flying the Red flag high above your homeland; they benefited from your natural resources and patrolled your streets daily. Happy with that? Of course you are...why are the Iraqis and Afghans resisting, right?

Ron Paul said something similar