Are We Past 'Peak Petrostate'?
It's the economics of energy production that make petrostates more trigger-happy, Emma Ashford argues in Oil, the State, and War.
It's the economics of energy production that make petrostates more trigger-happy, Emma Ashford argues in Oil, the State, and War.
Should they be banned?
Anne-Marie Slaughter hasn’t given up on intervention and the “responsibility to protect” doctrine.
She once suggested that if Americans care about the deficit so much, maybe we should make Libya pay for it.
History shows that expertise is not the same as wisdom.
Despite a change in administrations, U.S. foreign policy in the 2010s stayed its wasteful, destructive course.
Like Hillary Clinton, the senator seems to think that Libya is a foreign policy success story.
At least 242 civilians have been killed and at least 324 wounded by over 2,000 airstrikes, some of which were carried out by the American military.
A lot of people are dying in unauthorized wars.
"I have to accept my share of the blame for it," the ailing senator writes in a new book, even while defending several other interventions and surges.
Jihadists would be no threat to Americans who were left to mind their own business.
The dissonance between the countries the Trump EO primarily affects and countries associated with 9/11 is embedded in U.S. foreign policy.
For the libertarian-leaning senator, just about anybody would be better than John Bolton or Rudy Giuliani.
Five years after the fall of Gaddafi, some Libyans say life was better under dictatorship than the current chaos.
While mainstream journalists yuk it up about Libertarian's "disqualifying" mistake, they are nearly 100% silent about the massive UK parliament report exposing Libya as a trumped up and abysmally planned intervention
Hillary Clinton still calls Libya "smart power at its best," even though it looks more like what President Obama called it earlier this year-a "shit show."
To "exchange information" with local forces as they battle ISIS.
It's important to be the right kind of war hawk.
She refuses to learn from every failed foreign intervention.
On war and peace, he's dangerously unpredictable, while she's predictably dangerous.
It was Hillary Clinton's worst decision as secretary of state, yet Trump can't make a coherent case against it.
Obama looking to double down on past mistakes.
Waiting for the Libyan government to get it together.
Here's a short tutorial on everything that's wrong with interventionists' rationale for war and more war.
U.S. troops on the ground seeking potential fighting partners.
Neither could be expected to avoid further interventionist blunders.
Says it taught him to make sure interventions included plans for the aftermath.
Hillary Clinton was part of a campaign to mislead us about the purposes of the Libyan intervention.
Trump is more skeptical of foreign intervention, but both promise to boost military spending and destroy ISIS.
The former secretary of state does not learn from her mistakes, even when she admits them.
Who will call her on it?
The hawks' argument was not that Qaddafi's downfall was inevitable. It was the opposite.
We have always been at war with terror, or Libya, or ISIS, or whoever
If the delusional con man behind Innocence of Muslims can "spark" violence halfway around the word, who can't?
Clinton's intervention in Libya discredits her claim that she learned the lesson of Iraq.
Messes for a legacy.
Here's a crazy idea: How about we don't subsidize the Mubaraks or bomb the Qaddafis?
Individual persons who did no harm to anyone are being slaughtered and starved with the help of American politicians and military bureaucrats.
Will the Republicans nominate someone who can challenge the former secretary of state's reckless warmongering?
The liberal New York Times columnist and the libertarian ex-congressman are right to focus on failed Libya policy writ large.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10