02-07-2017, 03:03 PM
(02-07-2017, 02:35 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:(02-03-2017, 06:57 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: You've become MORE tolerant of neoconservatism in recent years? That's an interesting position, could you elaborate?
Pat Buchanan is, to my immense surprise, consistently an enjoyable and interesting read. The whole The American Conservative site is one of my primary news sources these days.
I used to be somewhat aligned with Paleocons, especially in the realms of Borders, Language and Culture. Where they started to lose me was when they got into the "Russia is the great outpost of White Christian civilization against the Muslim masses" bull shit. Also, way back when, I had a real hatred of globalism. That has become tempered. I now accept that we do need globalism in certain areas. But it needs to be toned down from the Thomas L Friedman extremist version. We need NATO and something like the UN. But that something needs to be of lesser scope and more practical. Regarding the EU, they should drop the economic standardization and continue with some other forms of cooperation that actually have an ROI.
Regarding so called wars of choice that Paleocons, Leftist extremists and other factions love to criticize, I provide the following defense. Granted, the Iraq War was not well executed. However, America First isolationism is not the answer. My view is, let us be proactive. Let us try to keep things like WW2 from happening again. By that I mean, while we may not always prevent a war, we can at least position ourselves so that when such a war arises, we have really great field position already, and, we are not asleep.
So, this is a thoughtful answer, but if you will excuse me for pointing this out, it looks like you switched sides when one became more rabidly anti-Russian than the other.
Also, out of curiosity, in what areas do you think we need "globalization"? Are you using that term to mean simply trade, or something else?