By Christopher A. Preble

After ten years of unconstrained growth, the Pentagon's budget simply must come down.

Several TNI regulars assess the campaign's last debate.

The most dramatic option for cutting defense spending also may be the only viable one.

Conscription won't save money. It will abridge young people's freedom.

Cuts won't devastate the economy. Even defense-heavy localities can adapt to lower levels of defense spending.

Robert Kagan has issued a cri de coeur urging Americans to reject calls for reduced U.S. military spending, curtailments in the country’s global commitments and restraint on its interventionist impulses. But his prescriptions are shortsighted.

Americans for Tax Reform insists that the Pentagon budget should not be preserved through tax increases. The defense industry is portraying cuts as a Texas chainsaw massacre.

Washington seems unsure of its goals for increased engagement in the Asia-Pacific region.

On Afghanistan and defense spending, Romney refuses to give the people what they want.

Americans want a "protect America first" policy, not a "send Americans first" one.

Holes keep popping up in the GOP hopeful's murky, unrealistic defense-spending proposal.

Romney should be compelled to answer the question on everyone’s mind: Where is he going to get the money to fund his Pentagon spending binge?

The questions Washington must be able to answer before pondering intervention in Syria.

Follow The National Interest

April 17, 2014