Death in Jordan
The U.S. and Iran are on a collision course—and that could mean war. Iranian-backed militants launched a drone strike on a military outpost in Jordan, resulting in the deaths of three U.S. service members stationed there. The attack was a response to continued U.S. support for Israel and its war effort against Hamas, an effort that has destroyed much of Gaza and resulted in 20,000 Palestinian casualties.
President Joe Biden vowed to respond to the attack. “Have no doubt: We will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner our choosing,” he tweeted Sunday afternoon.
Hawkish Republicans are already calling for open war with Iran, with Sens. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) and John Cornyn (R–Tex.) urging Biden to hit Iran hard. Their remarks drew swift rebukes from others on the right, including Tucker Carlson, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Candace Owens.
Former Rep. Justin Amash (L–Mich.) criticized the decision to keep U.S. troops “in harm’s way” all over the world without a clear mission or congressional authorization. He has a point: Doing so has endangered these soldiers’ safety and U.S. national security interests. Even if it is reasonable for the government to retaliate after an attack, the best policy would be to forestall this possibility by keeping the troops out of danger in the first place.
And while the Biden administration has stood firmly behind Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu—offering only mild, occasional criticism of Netanyahu’s war aims—perhaps Biden should consider whether total and unqualified support, and financial assistance, to Israel is undermining our own security.
The bottom line: The Middle East is in crisis, and the U.S. is being dragged into a broader military conflict of dubious necessity.
Biden wants the border deal, and he wants it now. The president is practically begging Democrats and Republicans to agree to legislation that would give him the authority “to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed.”
The Senate’s version of the current deal requires a shutdown of the border the number of illegal crossings reaches a certain threshold. At that point, migrants would be sent back to their home countries, whether or not they plan to claim asylum.
Mexico would need to agree to take back these migrants. But an even steeper challenge could be getting House Republicans on board. Former President Trump has ordered Speaker of the House Mike Johnson to nix anything short of a “perfect” border deal. Trump probably believes that he benefits politically from unrest at the border—and he’s right—so the GOP has very little incentive to actually agree to anything.
In any case, the Senate border plan is a mess, and springs from profoundly un-libertarian impulses: 4,999 migrant crossings is fine, but 5,000 is too many and should trigger a shutdown of the border and automatic deportations? Congress needs to make it easier for people to come to the U.S. legally and work here. Arbitrary caps make no sense.
Is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pursuing the Libertarian Party’s pre
Article from Latest
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.