Foreign Policy

When a president announces a military strike date in advance, it's not a threat. It's a message. The question is who's receiving it.

Nancy Pelosi wants you to forget what happened in 2011. She's counting on it.

Republican anxiety about a 'forever war' with Iran is legitimate. But anxiety alone doesn't produce strategy.

Americans are wary of another Middle East military commitment. That wariness is legitimate. It's also insufficient as a basis for grand strategy.

Sixty-five years of communist misery on an island 90 miles from Florida, and Washington spent most of that time looking the other way. Trump isn't looking away.

A top Democrat can't explain why Obama bombing Libya without congressional approval was fine, but Trump striking Iran is a constitutional crisis. The silence says everything.

House Democrats are scrambling to pass a war powers resolution on Iran. The politics are obvious, the constitutional argument is selective, and the strategy is pure theater.

While critics demand endless diplomatic theater, Trump's pressure campaign against Iran has achieved more in months than a decade of nuclear deals failed to produce.

Every foreign policy establishment figure says Trump needs a clear Iran strategy. They're wrong. The ambiguity is the strategy.

The Democratic Party is publicly agonizing over Trump's Iran approach. The honest answer is that they have no alternative — just objections.