Speaking of the imperial presidency, do you believe that the use of drones to target specific individuals means presidents have an unreviewable power to kill whomever they define as enemies? Do you favor "signature strikes" wherein drones attack not identifiable individuals but groups of young males whose characteristics match the "signature" of terrorists?
In 1949, one of NATO's founders said its purpose was "to keep the Americans in (Europe), the Germans down and the Russians out." What is its purpose now? Given that U.S. military spending is three times larger than the combined spending of NATO's other 27 members, is it not obvious that those nations feel no threat?
Bonus question: Might fewer than 54,000 U.S. forces in Germany suffice to defend that country, or Western Europe, from whatever threat they are there to deter?
George Will's email address is georgewill@washpost.com.
- Doug Robinson: Utah man's new running shoe...
- In our opinion: A darkening cloud is hanging...
- Letters: Federal encroachment
- My view: People deserve rights at our borders
- Richard Davis: Airlines should do more for...
- Michael Gerson: Reinvigorating the GOP will...
- Letters: Ending debt
- Snapshot of 2013 in political cartoons
Subscribe
Mobile
RSS
Geaorge Will is so talented at sounding totally reasonable while at the same time sticking daggers in the backs of those he is addre4ssing and discussing. These questions sound totally reasonable to be included in a Senate confirmation hearing and More..
"Might fewer than 54,000 U.S. forces in Germany suffice to defend that country, or Western Europe, from whatever threat they are there to deter?"
I think we spend way, way too much on the military. Still, I've heard this More..
@Timj
Don't we live in the jet age?
How much longer does it truly take to deploy troops from Ft. Benning, Georgia than from a base in Germany? Is the few hours difference really worth the billions we spend on bases in