Politics 2016: Who Will Stand Up to the War Party?

For anyone with hopes of changing our foreign policy of relentless aggression,
the presidential candidates now parading their wares before the public are truly
a depressing sight.

The Republicans are vying
with one another for the “honor” of being the most warlike, and even
Sen. Rand Paul
(R-Kentucky) — son of the resolutely anti-interventionist
Ron Paul, surely one of the most effective and militant critics of American
foreign policy — has joined in the contest. All the GOPers have taken aim at
President Obama’s deal with Iran: Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, two of the loudest,
are organizing a
September 9 rally
on Capitol Hill opposing the agreement.

On the Democratic side of the aisle, the picture doesn’t look much better.
Hillary Rodham Clinton has issued a rather tepid endorsement of the Iran deal,
but has vowed to “police” it — a stance that argues in favor of some in the
Israel lobby who say the deal could pave the way for conflict with Iran over
enforcement of its terms. Said
Clinton:

“This agreement will have to be enforced
vigorously [and] relentlessly. We have to treat this as an ongoing enforcement
effort that I certainly strongly support and as president will be absolutely
devoted to ensuring that the agreement is followed.”

Translation: At the first opportunity — “intelligence”
emanating from the Israelis or their front groups — I will ditch the deal and
take us on the road to war.

As for the alleged left-wing challenger in the Democratic ring, Sen. Bernie
Sanders (I-Vermont), the fact that months after launching his presidential bid
he still hasn’t put up a single foreign policy statement on his web site speaks
volumes. Martha Raddatz, interviewing
Sanders
on ABC’s “This Week,” noted that odd omission:

“[T]here are two issues that are entirely missing from your campaign
website, and those are issues of national security and foreign policy. Don’t
you feel these are issues that a president should be very concerned about?”

 

Read more