Antiwar vs Neocon: Scott Horton debates Bill Kristol

[Occam's Banana]

Scott Horton (director of the Libertarian Institute, editorial director of Antiwar.com, and host of the foreign policy interview podcast The Scott Horton Show) took on Bill Kristol as part of the Soho Forum debate series.

The debate occurred yesterday (04 October 2021) as a premium live-stream event. The resolution at issue was "A willingness to intervene, and to seek regime change, is key to an American foreign policy that benefits America." Kristol argued the affirmative (of course), and Horton argued the negative.

Here is a recording I found of the debate, the original not being (currently) available:

https://rumble.com/vncrg6-scott-hort...gn-policy.html

Kristol's opening argument starts @ 1:18
Horton's opening argument starts @ 18:33
Questions from the moderator start @ 49:54
Questions from the audience start @ 58:36

[Occam's Banana]

Oxford scoring was used to score the debate (see 1:31:57 in the OP video):
- Bill Kristol: START: 7% agreed ; END: 9.4% agreed = SCORE: 2.4 points
- Scott Horton: START: 72% agreed ; END: 85% agreed = SCORE: 12 points (rounded ?)

FTA: https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.co...e-sided-debate

The winner of the debate will be obvious to anyone watching. Horton plowed through criticisms of the way US foreign policy is constantly "creating its own disasters it must then attempt to solve" from his encyclopedic knowledge of interventionist bloodbaths and their undeniable repercussions while Kristol appeared frequently flustered, passed on multiple rebuttals, and got called on blatantly false claims. Horton rattled off nations, dates and death tolls in rapid succession and repeatedly referenced Kristol's own role in imperialist bloodshed, while Kristol relied almost entirely on insubstantial assertions to defend his position that “we can be at once a republic and a liberal empire" and empty dismissal of Horton's points about the destructive nature of various US foreign interventions.

In the end a deflated-looking Kristol gave closing remarks which amounted to little more than whining that Horton's position doesn't assume war hawks like himself are acting "in good faith", while Horton's closing statement just continued his blistering assault.

By the end of it you almost feel bad for old Bill.

The audience unsurprisingly sided overwhelmingly with Horton by a significantly greater margin at the end of the debate than the beginning. The only unanswered question when all was said and done was, how the hell did Kristol get it in his head that entering this debate was a good idea?

One can only assume hubris. Hubris arising from a life in an elitist echo chamber where his warped views are seldom challenged, and continual marination in the kind of unearned validation that only Beltway swamp monsters ever receive.

So watch and enjoy, folks. Participating in this kind of humiliating debate is not a mistake that any high-profile neocon is likely to repeat anytime soon.

[Invisible Man]

I was surprised that even as unabashed of an Iraq War supporter as Kristol now seems so shy about supporting it and flat out admits right in his opening statement without even being pushed that we were wrong about weapons of mass destruction and wouldn't have gone to war if we'd known that.

[jkr]

i cant believe this actually happened! Great job Scott!!

[Occam's Banana]

Replaced the YouTube video in the OP with one I just found on Rumble. Because $#@! YouTube.

It looks like the same recording, so the timestamps noted in the OP should be the same.

[Brian4Liberty]

How the mighty have fallen.

Will Kristol’s streak of being an influencer and handler of GOP Vice Presidential candidates finally end?

[Sammy]

Bill Kristol said that he is anti war

[Invisible Man]

So far I've only listened to Kristol's opening argument. Just starting Horton's now.

But I was shocked at how horrible Kristol was. I knew he was doomed to fail because he was trying to defend an indefensible position. But it was like he didn't even try. I think I could have done a better job making an opening statement for the affirmative on that resolution.

[Matt4Liberty]

Bill Kristol said that he is anti war

Much the same way he's a "conservative". How real conservatives allowed his daddy Irving to infiltrate their basic principles is beyond me. A big government Trotskyite all of a sudden became "right wing."

[Invisible Man]

How real conservatives allowed his daddy Irving to infiltrate their basic principles is beyond me.

It's much easier to understand once you recognize that his basic principles were essentially the same as their own all along.
https://rense.com/general80/red.htm

[Sammy]

Much the same way he's a "conservative". How real conservatives allowed his daddy Irving to infiltrate their basic principles is beyond me. A big government Trotskyite all of a sudden became "right wing."

Neocons are just pro war Leftists.

[Brian4Liberty]

It's much easier to understand once you recognize that his basic principles were essentially the same as their own all along.
https://rense.com/general80/red.htm

So you are saying that Lincoln was a Marxist?

[Invisible Man]

So you are saying that Lincoln was a Marxist?

At the very least he was sympathetic to and influenced by Marx's ideas and other contemporaries of his in the Republican Party and the cause of the Union absolutely were Marxists.

[Occam's Banana]

Tom Woods Show Ep. 1987 Neocon War Hawk Flattened in Debate
In a recent live event in New York City, the heroic Scott Horton, our great foreign-policy expert, debated Bill Kristol, one of the most influential neoconservatives, on the wisdom of "regime change" in U.S. foreign policy. Scott joins us today to review the highlights.
https://odysee.com/@TomWoodsTV:e/ep....flattened-in:f