Home | About | Donate

Neoconservatism and the Trump Effect


Neoconservatism and the Trump Effect

Derek Davison, Jim Lobe

With Texas Senator Ted Cruz suspending his campaign following Tuesday’s Indiana primary and Ohio Governor John Kasich suspending his campaign the following day, little stands between reality TV star Donald Trump and the Republican nomination.


Far be it from me to give advice to, or try to pressure, Bernie Sanders.

But in a four-way race among Trump, Clinton, Sasse or other Republican "savior," and Sanders, Sanders would win handily.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


While I'm no Trump fan, I don't think it serves any legitimate purpose to pretend that his foreign policy is completely unknowable and that what is known about it is completely lunacy. As Michael Hirsh outlined recently in Politico, Trump's basic foreign policy philosophy has been the dominant policy in the US for a greater length of time in the nation's existence than the current mainstream policy.



Notice the Bushes announced their plans to pull out of the convention just as the Panama Papers scandal broke ? Of course they blamed Trump even though their family ties to Panama go back a century and during the 1988 campaign progressives shined a light on Bush 41's dealings with Manuel Noriega (conveniently sidetracked by the media).


I think it's pretty clear which candidate Netanyahu would prefer for U.S. President.

Since the Neocons are all Israel First'ers, that's who they'd prefer too.

Clinton: I'll sacrifice U.S. soldiers so Israel doesn't have to.


YES, SANDERS! Also, remember this is not just about the elections, but what happens afterwards in the communities- keep being who you are and get others involved.


The cabal wins because we LET them win.


Eisenhower's prescient prophecy as per the ominous growth of the Military-Industrial Complex has come to pass. And with it, our fledgling Democratic Republic has been morphed into a military empire.

Thus, leaders who aim for the proverbial brass ring either act as willing servants of the MIC or don't (in which case, their careers will come to an abrupt halt one way or another). It doesn't matter what labels are used to cover their crimes against humanity.

My comment is in reference to this quote from the article:

"The notion that some of these disaffected neocons might gravitate to Clinton may seem surprising on the surface, but it should not come as a particularly great shock. As two recent New York Times reports, one on her overall foreign policy views and another specifically on the 2011 U.S. intervention in Libya, have made plain, Clinton’s foreign policy instincts are rooted in a fundamental belief that American military power can accomplish great and important things around the world. Her hawkishness can be better categorized as “liberal interventionist” than “neoconservative” (in other words, she believes in the importance of international institutions and in the potential use of American power to achieve liberal/humanitarian aims). The Libya intervention showed clearly that there is a nexus where liberal interventionists and neoconservatives can find common policy ground."

Liberal hawk?

Call it what is it--a water carrier/sycophant for the Military Industrial Complex and the Make-War (into perpetuity) military state/empire.


Try this:

"mealouts" is just the latest screen name to push a FIGHT back agent provocateur agenda. He wouldn't understand the logistical changes necessary if they hit him over the head.


One historical comparison to Trump is Huey Long from Louisiana. He was a popular demagogue who promised to "put a chicken in every pot", and other suggestions to releive the very real poverty conditions in the state. He was reviled by the established politicians, and eventually assassinated to the general relief of the ruling class, and many others. But he pushed a lot of progressive legislation that is still in force, or was. (Charity Hospital in New Orleans was one of his projects and was closed after Katerina.)
The people who support Trump are as deeply deprived by their political elites as were the rural Southerns of both races in Huey's era. He was American: fraudulent, undemocratic, domineering, rich, and a political genius. This comment is not an endorsement; it is just some food for thought.


Watch who Trump and whoever is the Democratic nominee place in the VP slot. Why do you think that Poppy put frat-boy Dan Quayle and Nixon installed Spiro Agnew and subsequently Gerald Ford in that office? Call it assassination insurance. I hope Trump puts Dr.Ben Carson on the ticket. What a perfect dilemma, an African American and obnoxious NY wise guy on the ticket of the party of Reagan, Bush (both of them!), and Cheney.


Yes, Trump’s actually for ending Empire and looking after American citizens and we know him better than what this propaganda article suggests (trying to make Kagan look moderate is the most laughable thing since comedy became a genre). That the neo-cons hate him should be sufficient reason why, if Sanders is cheated of his nomination, Trump should be the choice for voters. Unless Sanders run as independent or join third parties like the Greens.


Yes, despite flaws, the US had been, at various times, the most democratic country in the world. This is something that even Chomsky seems to deny, though his observation that sovereignty lies in the American people is noteworthy.