The notion that the US should use its military forces to police the world and determine its future has been a bipartisan disaster for a long time. The opposition to this concept has been centered with the left wing of the Democratic Party in recent years but there are signs now that it may be losing favor in conservative circles as well. Andrew Bacevich, the intellectual leader of the opposition, is himself a conservative by inclination and Pat Buchanan has been outspoken in his magazine “The American Conservative.” Most recently Rand Paul has caused a stir by his opposition to international meddling and his potential as a Republican presidential candidate.
Today Paul Mulshine, a conservative columnist for the Star-Ledger has taken on Max Boot, who has evidently advocated US military action against both Bashar Asssad and ISIS in Syria. Max Boot is a neo-conservative who is the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, a title that should tip you off on his thinking.
In his column Mulshine mentions that he researched the issue by consulting with Andrew Bacevich. What’s happening here? Are the conservatives going to take over this issue? Can Rand Paul get conservative support for his campaign? Are the Democrats going to continue their hopeless quest for so-called centrism? Will Obama never rid himself of Susan Rice?