Source: Responsible Statecraft
by Yerevan Saaed

“As a tactic, arming the Kurds has real operational merit. But the question is whether the United States intends to convert Kurdish wartime service into a lasting institutional and political commitment after regime change. In Iraq, Washington largely followed through: Kurds secured constitutional recognition, a federal region, and their own Peshmerga forces. In Syria, the outcome was the opposite. When the U.S. withdrew political and military support, the Kurds were left exposed to the new regime in Damascus. Arms can flow, but whether a binding alliance follows is the only question that determines if this venture ends in some form of Kurdish self-determination or another cycle of mobilization, abandonment, and reprisal.” (03/08/26)

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/kurds-iran-war/

Source: Foundation for Economic Education
by Walter Block

“Ordinarily, in the absence of such market interferences, free trade would be the policy most conducive to prosperity. We produce the products for which we have a comparative advantage, and interfere with the international division of labor as little as possible. However, matters change with marketing boards. Is it possible that a second economically illiterate regulation may benefit us by (partially) reducing the impact of the first? Yes, without marketing boards, free trade is the ticket to economic well-being. But with them, is there a case for tariffs on grounds of economic development? Here is the argument in favor of such a paradoxical hypothesis.” (03/08/26)

https://fee.org/articles/marketing-boards-are-a-menace/

Source: Notablog
by Chris Matthew Sciabarra

“This war with Iran is an extension of the dynamics that have always driven US foreign policy. And nothing will stop this President from the path of destruction he has chosen — certainly not the Congress, which has long been ceding its constitutional responsibilities to the executive branch. Indeed, House Speaker Mike Johnson denies that the US is even involved in a ‘war.’ And Senate Republicans have blocked any war power limits to this operation, giving Trump a rubberstamp to do whatever the hell he wants. The warmongers among us serve the administration by labeling as ‘traitors’ those who oppose US intervention abroad. This has become a virtual rite of passage for critics in times of war.” (03/07/26)

https://notablog.net/2026/03/07/the-operation-was-a-success-but-the-patient-died/

Source: Garrison Center
by Joel Schlosberg

“A New York Times columnist offering pointers for ‘Pitchfork Pat’ Buchanan-type populists on ‘the isolationist right who thought Trump shared his views’ might seem akin to a mad scientist named Frankenstein offering a road map to a pitchforks-and-torches peasant mob.  Yet Michelle Goldberg does just that in ‘The President Was Never Antiwar’ (March 2). While maintaining that Donald Trump was indeed the embodiment through which ‘the once marginalized politics of Patrick Buchanan became a dominant force in the Republican Party,’ Goldberg insists that ‘Trump was never Buchanan’s heir when it came to foreign policy.’ … While ‘it is true that he broke with key elements of neoconservative ideology,’ he hasn’t distanced himself from even ‘the most fanatical of neoconservatives,’ preferring instead to discard the ideology’s ‘notion that American power should ever be constrained by a veneer of idealism.'” (03/07/26)

https://thegarrisoncenter.org/archives/20399