Just a partial list. More at the link: http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/victordavishanson/index
Let me know if you want in or out.
Links: FR Index of his articles: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson
His website: http://victorhanson.com/
NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp
Pajamasmedia: http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/
I kind of look at Obama like I look at Amnesty International.
You dont see Amnesty attacking Iran or Afghanistan They attack easy targets that dont fight back, like the United States.
Obama doesnt attack Iran he attacks little Honduras.
Easy target , versus hard target.
Shouldn't this have been "illegal second term"?
Of course the U.S. wasn't with them. After all, in Obama's view, the U.S. is the big villain in the Middle East, not terrorist states like Iran or terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. If only we were more sensitive to Islamic sensibilities and more hostile to Israeli "aggression," then we would have earned the respect and love of the Mullahs and the other Islamic crazies in the Middle East.
It's no wonder at all that Obama waited until the Iranian regime had crushed the dissenters to start speaking out against them, that his criticism was too little and too late.
It is clear that Obama, who can't rise above his prejudices against the U. S., whose first instinct is to blame America for the world's problems, is completely unprepared to be at the helm of U.S. foreign policy, that he can't put the interests of this country or the interests of peoples around the world who want to share in the freedoms that we have in this country ahead of his own ideological biases. It is tragic to have an incompetent ideologue like Obama as President because his failures are not only hurting this country and adversely affecting American influence around the world, they are hurting people like the Iranian demonstrators who to look to the U.S. for moral support.
Who Knew They Weren't Democrats, After All? [Victor Davis Hanson]
One of the strangest things about the Iranian tragedy is this spate of mea culpa confessionals from columnists who for the last two years insisted that Bush's decision not to talk to the thuggish Ahmadinejad — e.g., his sending terrorists into Lebanon to destroy democracy; trying to kill Americans in Iraq with lethal IEDs and assassinate Iraqi democrats; subsidies for rocketeers in Gaza; promising to exterminate Israel; violating U.N. non-proliferation accords; rounding up and eliminating journalists, minorities, and dissidents — was at best counterproductive, and at worst proof of his cowboyish know-nothingism.
Now they've had and gone through our callous realpolitik moment, in which we sat on the sidelines as thousands of brave reformers were silenced. Our administration worried that the internationalist Obama would not have his long-awaited chance to show his "this is our moment" post-nationalist stuff, in charming Ahmadinejad and a few theocrats to promise to kill and maim fewer people.
And as a result they seem to be "shocked" that
1) Iran is really not a democracy after all, and that, after 30 years, it still rigs elections, preselects candidates, and kills off opponents, confident that its thin veneer of voting fools Western elites;
2) does not much care whether we talk or not to its clerics, and whether we act nicely or badly toward them;
3) long ago figured that what little downside there was to getting the bomb was far outweighed by the upside (cf. the deference showed to Pakistan post-1998), and nothing was/is going to stop them.
After what we did to the South Vietnamese, I don’t know why anyone would trust us.