Is the U.S. a rogue state?

Is the U.S. a rogue state?


I’ve got my own takes on the detainee bill and the warrantless wiretapping bill. But Matthew Yglesias at the American Prospect asks an interesting question: Has the U.S. become a rogue state?

Agree or not, it’s a thought-provoking read.

Previous articleBoot-On-Neck Democracy.
Next articleThis is freedom?
  • Alan Stewart Carl

    I find Matthew Yglesias’ brand of rhetoric to be hyperbolic at best. Usually it’s cynically deceptive, relying on trite caricatures of the motives and agendas of The Big Evil Conservatives.

    This article is not much different. I’m a huge opponent of torture but find this kind of argument to be much more harmful than helpful. The U.S. a rogue state? Please. That kind of talk just confuses the reality and makes it easier for the pro-torture knuckleheads to paint all torture opponents as American-bashing moonbats.

    Torture is a serious, serious issue and it’s disgusting that this administration would even try to defend its use … BUT we can make that point without resorting to intelectually dishonest debates about whether we are or are not a rogue state.

  • Sean Aqui

    I agree that Yglesias isn’t always worth listening to, and parts of this particular argument are hyperbolic. Especially the bits about the rule of law being “off the table” and the U.S. not looking like a democracy. Like it or not, the detainee bill was debated and passed within the confines of both law and democracy.

    But while the “rogue state” question might be over the top, it still raises the interesting point of “what separates us from those states we have condemned in the past?” And also asks the related question, “what kind of country does this make us?”

    Worth thinking about, anyway.

  • probligo

    Can I suggest that there is another aspect – I can not believe that Yglesias has not mentioned it.

    Who remembers the ICC – the International Criminal Court – these days? Who remembers the history of the US’s involvement in the formation and participation in the Court?

  • sleipner

    Short answer – yes we are. I don’t think this article is hyperbole at all, I think it’s due entirely to G.W. and his illegal, immoral, and unconstitutional grabs for domestic power and international hegemony.

    He expects all other countries to abide by not only ratified treaties, but also whatever he tells them he thinks they should do. On the flip side, he writes nearly a thousand “signing statements” reinterpreting or bypassing the will of the Congress, and ignores whichever treaties or international laws he feels are in his way.

    Removing Bush/Cheney from office will go a long way towards returning America to the democracy it once was under Clinton. The incalculable damage he is directly responsible for at home and abroad will take decades to even mitigate, much less fix.