"Democrats have become the Party of War"

Adam Walinsky, who served as legislative assistant and speechwriter for Robert Kennedy, explains why this year he is voting for Donald Trump:

John and Robert Kennedy devoted their greatest commitments and energies to the prevention of war and the preservation of peace. To them that was not an abstract formula but the necessary foundation of human life. But today’s Democrats have become the Party of War: a home for arms merchants, mercenaries, academic war planners, lobbyists for every foreign intervention, promoters of color revolutions, failed generals, exploiters of the natural resources of corrupt governments. We have American military bases in 80 countries, and there are now American military personnel on the ground in about 130 countries, a remarkable achievement since there are only 192 recognized countries. Generals and admirals announce our national policies. Theater commanders are our principal ambassadors. Our first answer to trouble or opposition of any kind seems always to be a military movement or action.

Nor has the Democratic Party candidate for president this year, Hillary Clinton, sought peace.

And now playing in a country near you:

Read the whole thing. And read this for some illumination why The War Party has no vision ever to stop: "Chronic Virtue," the devotion of the Democrats to successively-failing peace processes that never bring and end to the conflicts and so enable the administration to keep sending bombers and drones to keep killing actual and assumed enemies.

There is no obvious end for the conflict which began on September 11, 2001, nor any plan for winning it.  The conflict is now sometimes referred to as the Forever War. Plan B for Kerry's now demised ceasefire is instructive.  According to the Wall Street Journal, the next move is to expand the war on general principles, though to what end no one seems to be able to explain. ...

One reason for the "Forever War" is because winning has become optional. Unlike WW2 when Roosevelt and Truman were under pressure to win the war and bring the boys home, Obama's America can sustainably fight major conflicts without putting masses of voters under arms.  Whenever things get dicey, the administration can just send a B-1 over to restore the balance so Kerry can go back to the nth doomed ceasefire.

Today with the draft abolished and in possession of gee-whiz weapons which are orders of magnitude more powerful than anything Assad or ISIS has, Obama can avoid the hard question of ends with endless procrastination. Freed from the risk of actual defeat by a crushing military superiority, Washington doesn't have to identify the enemy or seek victory. It can devote itself to the ends-free activity of pursuing the Process.

In common with many modern intellectuals he can regard winning as unnecessary and even evil, a triumphalism, a kind of bullying act, since as someone famously put it: "war never solves anything". In the absence of the concept of victory the Peace Process can be pursued for its own sake. Indeed the administration's entire objective in Syria has apparently been to to stay on the diplomatic road, to keep talking, to keep negotiating, to stagger from ceasefire to ceasefire, each more fragile than the last, so frail that they don't even believe in it themselves. Why? Because that's the "right thing to do".

The result of such high-mindedness alas is not peace but endless conflict, suffering without cease, the destruction of nations, the dissolution of borders, the maiming and death of hundreds of thousands. But there was no overt aggression; nothing to be blamed for. Forever War has become cheap for political elites. Never has virtue signalling and indecisiveness been so affordable. 

Forever Wars are the ultimate liberal foreign policy luxury. 

Does not today's Democrat party make you think of the classic definition of insanity? Why yes, yes it does.