Aggregating the best in libertarian news daily from a number of leading sites:
The Beacon, FEE, Laissez-Faire, Lew Rockwell, Personal Liberty,
Reason, Scott Adams & Sex & The State. See our Sources

U.S. to Keep More Troops in Afghanistan Through 2017

Once upon a time, when a Republican was president, there was a lot of mainstream interest in the status of America’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2008, Barack Obama won the presidency in part by promising to end the war in Iraq and focus on the “good war” in Afghanistan. In 2012 President Obama ran for re-election claiming he had ended the war in Iraq and was ending the war in Afghanistan.

Obama had not ended the Iraq war, and after the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), he insisted the decision to end the war for which he took credit in the re-election campaign was not a decision for which he was responsible. Even in 2012 it looked like Obama was not ending the war in Afghanistan.

Since then the U.S. has blown through several timetables set by President Obama on Afghanistan withdrawal. In 2015 Obama announced 6,000 U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan through 2017, leading Nick Gillespie to ask “What Part of Pulling Out Does Obama Not Understand?

The not-ending of the war in Afghanistan continues today, with President Obama announcing 8,400 troops would remain in Afghanistan through next year. “The narrow missions assigned to our forces will not change,” Obama insisted. “They’ll remain focused on supporting Afghan forces and going after terrorists.”

Obama said the higher troop levels, recommended by his military advisors, would “allow us to continue to provide tailored support to help Afghan forces continue to improve… [and] continue supporting Afghan forces on the ground and in the air.”

The U.S. role in Afghanistan is not limited to training and support. A U.S. air strike in May took out the leader of the Taliban. President Obama said at the time that he hoped the Taliban would “seize the opportunity” and rejoin peace talks with the Afghan government. Instead the Taliban chose a harder hardliner as its new leader. Afghan troops, meanwhile, suffer from low morale and desertion, sometimes withdrawing from entire districts.

Last year, the U.S. hit a Doctors Without Borders facility in Afghanistan, representing the first time one Nobel Peace Prize winner (President Obama, 2009) bombed another Nobel Peace Prize winner (Doctors Without Borders, 1999). The U.S. blamed a series of errors but no one faced anything other than “administrative” charges for the incident, in which 42 people were killed.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has called the Afghanistan war a “mistake” but has nevertheless insisted U.S. troops must remain in the country. Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton has backed postponing the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson said he supported the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan during the 2012 election cycle, but the war has not been a major issue in the 2016 campaign so far.

Obama heads to Warsaw this week for a NATO summit at which the alliance’s nearly 15-year-long mission in Afghanistan is expected to be discussed. At the meeting NATO is also expected to agree to deploying four multinational battalions to Poland and the Baltic states. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also highlighted that military spending by “European Allies and Canada” was expected to rise by 3 percent, or 8 billion dollars, this year. Much of the increased spending has come from Poland and the Baltic states.

Read More →
The Big Fat Lie: New at Reason

In moderation, fat doesn’t appear to harm health or cause weight gain. Who knew?

A. Barton Hinkle writes:

If you have even a passing acquaintance with current events, then you’ve probably seen a host of headlines about the ostensible revolution in dietary thinking. “Eating Fat Is Good for You: Doctors change their minds after 40 years,” blared a London newspaper in 2013. “Why Experts Now Think You Should Eat More Fat,” explained Men’s Journal the next year.

Last month The Economist made “The Case for Eating Steak and Ice Cream.” Last week Time argued that “The Case for Eating Butter Just Got Stronger.” That article cited an earlier Time cover story noting that “fat had become ‘the most vilified nutrient in the American diet’ despite the scientific evidence showing it didn’t harm health or cause weight gain in moderation.”

The new dietary bugbear is sugar, now the target of “Twinkie taxes,” soda taxes, and the opprobrium of public scolds everywhere.

This is pretty big news, given the drumbeat of advice Americans have been receiving for so long. Starting in the 1980s the federal government’s urged people to shun fats and cholesterol and load up on carbs. A 1990s food pyramid from the USDA placed bread, rice, and pasta at the base, suggesting a person eat six to 11 servings a day—but only two or three servings of meat or eggs and even less of fats.

View this article.

Read More →