-
Judge Pryor Gains New Post, Respect
June 12, 2013 | 2 comments
-
D-Day Reflections
June 6, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Michael Ledeen has been right about Iran at every turn ever since the 1970s. He’s the foremost U.S. expert (in my book at least, along with many others) on Iran. Today, he praises Rick Santorum’s record on Iran and Syria. Great column in the Wall Street Journal. Note that Santorum’s approach is NOT a militar-first, interventionist approach. It focuses on sanctions that might actually work, combined with the Reagan tactic of funding local democracy movements so they can win their own freedom. Such democracy movements were especially strong in Iran until Barack Obama betrayed them. Ledeen rightly rejects the assertion that Santorum is a “neocon.” What he is, is a Reaganite. When I interviewed him a couple of weeks ago, he didn’t explicitly embrace the “Weinberger Doctrine” that was usually followed by Reagan (e.g. go in only with force overwhelmingly strong for the particular mission, with a clearly defined objection, etcetera, but use military force only when no other avenues seem available), but he said he agreed with what he understood as its basic thrust. If you read his foreign/defense policy speeches and papers over the years, you see a rather subtle, carefully contextual approach. I would describe it as strongly pro-defense (peace through strength) and strongly in favor of force projection — but NOT necessarily equating “force” with military action. Maybe “force” is the wrong word. It’s more like “strength projection.” It’s as close to Reaganite as anybody on the scene today.
View all comments (44) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/25/ledeen-on-santorum-very-good
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Oldefarte| 2.25.12 @ 5:07PM
Santorum is not mentioned in the book REAGAN, THE MAN, THE PRESIDENT [which encompassed Reagan's California governorship as well as his US Presidency]. I'm not exactly sure if/when the political careers of Santorum and Reagan intersected, however Gingrich is so mentioned numerous times!!!!!!
chuck| 2.26.12 @ 9:36AM
Santorum was elected well after Reagan left office. Of course he would not be mentioned by Reagan.
Oldefarte| 2.26.12 @ 1:18PM
Reagan was California's governor from 1/2/67 to 1/6/75, and president of the US from 1/20/81 to 1/20/89. Santorum was a Pennsylvaina congressman from 1/3/91 to 1/3/07. Do you ignorantly mean to state that Reagan could NOT HAVE KNOWN, BEEN AWARE OF, OR EVER MET Santorum as both were members/political activists within the Republican Party? That's completely imbicilic, because of course they would have naturally been aware of each other and interacted within Republican conventions, meetings ect!!!!!!!!
Clint| 2.26.12 @ 6:35PM
Ronald Reagan On Dr.Ron Paul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyXW1hb-JQg
Ricky Santorum Jr.| 2.26.12 @ 11:36AM
God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural... fluids. God bless you all.
William R| 2.25.12 @ 5:08PM
Yes, Santorum is a NeoCon hack.
Reagan’s wisdom on the Middle East: Leave
http://orangepunch.ocregister......leave/619/
RJ| 2.26.12 @ 12:34AM
Interesting article. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Eisenhower also had a deployment in Lebanon, about 10,000 troops to support the civilian government. After they were there, some recommended that they deploy further into the country. He said no, the US could offer limited support, but if US troops were needed throughout the country, the government was too weak to stand and he wanted the soldiers in a spot where they could easily be removed. Since the Eisenhower administration, the US has been too quick to deploy the military, often for problems which do not have a military solution.
William R| 2.25.12 @ 5:22PM
Neocon theorist Michael Ledeen draws more from Italian fascism than from the American Right.
http://www.theamericanconserva...../30/00013/
Nock| 2.26.12 @ 11:38AM
Thanks for posting. The American Conservative has these Neo Con chickenhawks' numbers.
Drek| 2.25.12 @ 6:28PM
Hillyer, you've tended to misrepresent Santorum's present position.
Santorum is closer towards my position than he currently is towards Ledeen's.
Ledeen desires the "opposition" supported through various ways, for he's confident that such support will topple the regime, and that would spare us the burden of taking out their Manhattan project.
Santorum, AS HE NOTED DURING A minor skirmish with Gingrich in an earlier debate, thinks that we've run out of time, and that the F15E Strke Eagles need to be sent in now.
Gingrich believes that through industrial sabotage, along with supporting the opposition, we can either maneuver the leadership away from their Manhattan project, or render them unable to pursue their dreams.
RJ| 2.26.12 @ 12:38AM
Regarding your reference to Santorum, I just don't think that air strikes are going do the job. A war against Iran, perhaps started by Israel with the US dragged in, will involve much more than an air war.
Nock| 2.26.12 @ 11:45AM
Wrong, if there is one thing the last three wars have taught us is that an air war IS ENOUGH.
And I really am Napoleon!
Bob K.| 2.26.12 @ 10:35PM
But you still need the boots to mop it up and where will they come from?
Ryan| 2.27.12 @ 10:09AM
Define "air war."
Drek| 2.25.12 @ 6:32PM
And in as much as Reagan supported the IAF's strike against the Iraqis, DESPITE THE VIRULENT OPPOSITION of the Bush apparat within his administration, and since Reagan was supported solely by Alexander Haig, --------- the evidence then tends to lead us to believe that Reagan would favour doing whatever needs to be done to rip the fangs out of the mouth of the Iranian regime.
William R| 2.25.12 @ 6:52PM
Reagan did not support Israels attack on Iran. In fact the administration pressured congress to condemn the attack.
William R| 2.25.12 @ 7:02PM
scuze me. Reagan did not support Israels attack on Iraq.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.12 @ 9:56PM
Yes, he did. In private, not public, because of idiots like you, William.
Cheney thanked the Israelis when he was SecDef during the Gulf War I for hitting Osirak.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 2.26.12 @ 8:16AM
OT: I agree with you, plus the Carter Administration didn't tell his (incoming) Administration that the Israelis had talked about their plans to bomb Iraq, which left him in the dark when it happened. So at worst, he was surprised by it, but that's all!! What he said in public was just lip service, to calm everybody down, especially using the UN to condemn the attack. Reagan was no fan of Saddam, and certainly didn't want him to get nuclear bombs, EVER!! On a side note, back in 2009 I actually got to visit that site while I was in Iraq. And after 28 years, the Iraqis still haven't cleaned up the place, the buildings are still lying in ruins. It was a pretty cool thing to see!!
Nock| 2.26.12 @ 11:46AM
In private? Were you hiding in Reagan's closet? Time to come out of the closet, gay boy OT.
Oldefarte| 2.26.12 @ 1:25PM
The definition of private is NOT PUBLIC [as he states]; meaning NOT DECLARED OFFICIALLY AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. Try reading something other than PAULISTA COMIC BOOKS, dumbars!!!!!!
Bob K.| 2.26.12 @ 10:40PM
I think the question here, remembering that we are talking about politicians, is: Why was it not official?
C Bowen | 2.26.12 @ 6:32PM
Iraq was an ally during that part of the Cold War, so Reagan could not have endorsed it as the Bushies like Rumsfeld and Cheney were making money off the regime. That whole BCCI/export-import bank scandal...
Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul both defended Israeli sovereignty to act in their own defense.
Now that an attack on Iran would cost plenty of US debt financed treasure and blood, no patriot can support such a suicidal proposition.
Ledeen of course is not a patriot, but a, by his own description, a 'universal fascist.'
William R| 2.26.12 @ 6:55PM
You're dreaming
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/w.....d-1.400542
Mimi| 2.26.12 @ 8:15AM
REAGAN......" BOYS, WILL BE BOYS"
C Bowen | 2.25.12 @ 7:31PM
Ledeen, Quin?
The guy's was palling around with the Italian intelligence figure who forged the Niger Uranium documents.
Remember how he helped lie the country into invading Iraq, Quin?
Ledeen has also stumped for the MEK--a Marxist terrorist organization. If he has been paid by these terrorists like John Bolton, then he has broken yet another law.
Dai Alanye | 2.25.12 @ 9:28PM
Never mind the Italian guy, it's confirmed fact that Saddam approached Niger for uranium, and Joe Wilson himself was the confirmer while on assignment from the CIA. Then he lied about it, saying Saddam had *not* approached Niger, thereby succeeding in taking in many simpletons.
As for MEK, the equation is this: the enemy of our enemy is our friend.
C Bowen | 2.26.12 @ 7:28AM
LOL--did Curveball tell you that one Dai?
Are you soft on treason? I mean stumping for a terrorist organization is against the law. You and Ledeen are likely pro-Al Qeada now that AQ are allies against the Syrian government.
Clint| 2.25.12 @ 9:04PM
Ronald Reagan,
" Perhaps we didn't appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines' safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believed the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today."
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Dai Alanye | 2.25.12 @ 9:33PM
And had RonPaul been politically active in 1942 he would have opposed the Doolittle raid.
"Why don't we just give the Philippines to Japan, and maybe they'll let us keep Guam. Then we won't have to spend all that money sending an aircraft carrier way out in the Pacific Ocean." Imagine for yourself the whiny tone and flippy hand gestures.
Clint| 2.26.12 @ 6:06AM
You're An Israel Firster Smear Bund Liar, Dai Job.
The United States Congress Declared War On Japan On December 8th,1941.
The Doolittle Raid Was Four Month After The United States Declared War On Japan, On April 18th, 1942.
Dr.Ron Paul," I Will Ask Congress For A Declaration Of War Against Iran, If Necessary."
Dr.Ron Paul's Foreign Policy Advisor, Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Chief Of The bin Laden Unit,
" On Iran, The President should:
Speak to the American people and tell them to expect to be brutally propagandized by U.S. citizen Israel-Firsters through AIPAC, their ubiquitous media shills, and the men and women they own in the U.S. Congress and federal bureaucracy. Urge Americans to ignore this effort by U.S. Israel-Firsters to get them to send their soldier-children to fight in a religious war in which the U.S. has no genuine national interest at stake, and in which U.S. participation would further bankrupt the country, require the reintroduction of conscription, and put America at war with all of the Muslim world -- Shia and Sunni -- for the foreseeable future."
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Nock| 2.26.12 @ 11:48AM
Your beloved World War II gave the commies half of Europe and Korea and all of China and Indochina. How'd that work out for you?
Bob K.| 2.26.12 @ 10:45PM
Not exactly: Roosevelt and Truman did at Yalta and Potsdam.
Nock| 2.27.12 @ 9:40AM
Same difference.
CONSERVATIVE| 2.26.12 @ 1:58PM
'...Ronald Reagan probably provided the best insight into involvement with the Middle-East in his autobiography;
Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.
Intervening with Middle-Eastern affairs has lead to us arming such characters as Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, and now potentially whomever makes up the “freedom fighters” in Libya this time. The CIA has warned about blow-back in the past; perhaps it is time we heed that warning. Involvement and arming certain people today is no guarantee that they won’t turn those weapons against you later. The irrationality of Middle-Eastern politics and activism (usually both are on the militant side) is not simply dealt with. The best of intentions on our part is easily turned on its head and used against us later…tragically, sometimes as a military ship being bombed or NYC being attacked.
These decisions are never delivered easily. At the end of the day, if we stand for self-governance and national sovereignty, we should promote that by example. Paying off dictators who agree to do what we tell them to do goes against the very pillars of our nations founding. Should we intervene, we must be ready to pull the plug on the operation at any moment, and ensure that we understand the risks; simply showing someone the path of liberty doesn’t mean that they will choose to walk down it. Ultimately, people will get the government they deserve. When dealing with irrationality, the only certainty is uncertainty.....'
Bill| 2.25.12 @ 10:19PM
Guess Who?
voted for
1. Raising the debt ceiling 5 times
2. Planned Parenthood
3. Medicare Part D
4. NCLB
5. Bridge to nowhere
voted against
1. "Right-to-Work" law
Ans: "Keystone big-government RINO" Rick Santorum
Your Excellency| 2.26.12 @ 6:59AM
Quin how can one be the foremost expert among others?
aware| 2.26.12 @ 7:16AM
Ledeen rightly rejects the assertion that Santorum is a "neocon."
Ha! Neocon says a neocon is not a neocon. Good one!
Nock| 2.26.12 @ 11:41AM
Quite right. Even the Neo Con chickenhawks are embarrassed to be known as NeoCon chickenhawks. Their day is over.
Carlton West| 2.26.12 @ 9:32AM
Ledeen hearts Santorum? Another reason never to vote for him.
Ricky Santorum Jr.| 2.26.12 @ 11:40AM
Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
Dan Phillips| 2.27.12 @ 2:02PM
Santorum's position on Iran is alarmism and fearmongering first. This is the same guy who is scared of Venezuela.