triangulation, post-partisanship, and eerily familiar neo-conservative post Cold War global US domination.

I am quite familiar with Kurt Campbell through his book - Hard Power The New Politics of National Security.

I do not want more of the same with a new Clinton administration.

I will add that Kurt Campbell also has very strong connections to the Aspen Strategy Group whose emeritus members include such neo-cons as Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Judith Miller. He is also connected to CSIS who have been very involved with foreign policy in the Obama administration, are huge proponents of NAFTA, and their highest funding amount comes from corporate sources.

Get your MIC stock options right here! Pay off those student loans & hitch your pitiful savings to the One Percent investment plan. All war, all the time!

view America's duties and obligations? How does it view America's relationship to other nations? How does it view the rights of other nations and questions of sovereignty, self-determination, etc.? How does it view the morality of military intervention?

Just because the name Center for a New American Security is similar to the nefarious PNAC (Project for the New American Century) doesn't say anything about how close the two organizations are in outlook.

Below is the first page of results from the "Publications" link on the CNAS website. Maybe they have something good to say, maybe not.

Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization: A Primer
Phillip Carter and Katherine Kidder examine the growth of military compensation in the post-Cold War era, from 1990 to 2015, as well as the social contract America has with its All-Volunteer Force, and the ways in which monetary compensation should be considered as part of a broader talent management strategy for the armed forces.
-- Phillip Carter, Katherine Kidder. January 27, 2015.

Slow Thaw: Testing Possibilities for Cooperation with Iran After a Nuclear Deal
With nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States restarting today, Center for a New American Security (CNAS) Middle East Security Program Director Ilan Goldenberg, CNAS Bacevich Fellow Jacob Stokes, and CNAS Middle East Program Research Associate Nicholas Heras have produced a new policy brief on potential cooperation with Iran in the wake of a nuclear deal.
-- Ilan Goldenberg, Jacob Stokes, Nicholas Heras. January 15, 2015.

Defend, Defect, or Desert?: The Future of the Afghan Security Forces
In "Defend, Defect, or Desert?: The Future of the Afghan Security Forces,” Tyler Jost, a former U.S. Army Company Commander who served two tours in Afghanistan, lays out how the United States can most effectively support the Afghan National Security Forces.
-- Tyler Jost. January 8, 2015.

Arctic 2015 and Beyond: A Strategy for U.S. Leadership in the High North
Three Arctic experts lay out the challenges and opportunities that face the United States as it assumes the chair of the Arctic Council in April 2015.
-- Elizabeth Rosenberg, Dr. David Titley, Alexander Wiker. December 11, 2014.

Autonomous Weapon Systems at the United Nations
CNAS experts Michael Horowitz, Paul Scharre and Kelley Sayler examine the issues facing U.N. delegates, along with recommendations for action.
-- Michael Horowitz, Paul Scharre, Kelley Sayler. November 10, 2014.

How This Ends: A Blueprint for De-Escalation in Syria
Deputy Director of Studies and Leon E. Panetta Fellow Dr. Dafna H. Rand and Research Associate Nicholas Heras argue for the importance of focusing on a political framework for de-escalating the civil conflict in Syria.
-- Dafna Rand, Nicholas Heras. November 6, 2014.

Seizing the Modi Moment: Reenergizing U.S.-India Ties on the Eve of the Prime Minister’s Visit
CNAS President Richard Fontaine offers an agenda of deepened strategic ties between the United States and India in anticipation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the United States in late September.
-- Richard Fontaine. September 22, 2014.

Bringing Liberty Online: Reenergizing the Internet Freedom Agenda in a Post-Snowden Era
CNAS President Richard Fontaine argues that, despite the many complications arising from the Snowden disclosures, America still needs a comprehensive Internet freedom strategy.
-- Richard Fontaine. September 18, 2014.

Charting the Course: Directions for the New NATO Secretary General
A new policy brief by CNAS' Strategy and Statecraft Program timed in conjunction with the NATO Summit September 4-5, makes recommendations on key issues like NATO’s response to Russia and Ukraine, military capabilities, crisis management in the Middle East, and Arctic security.
-- Jacob Stokes, Julianne Smith, Nora Bensahel, David W. Barno, USA (Ret.). September 2, 2014.

That the deputy director is funded via being designated a "Leon E. Panetta Fellow" speaks volumes as to the political philosophy of this organization.

And she has the requisite connection to HRC: From 2010 to 2012, she covered the Middle East and North Africa for Secretary Hillary Clinton's Policy Planning Staff, and in this capacity contributed to the U.S. government's response to the Arab Spring, including diplomatic planning for the intervention in Libya and the U.S. response to the Syrian conflict.

So if Panetta's war-like policies and CIA background are your cup of tea, you'll love this outfit. And doubtless you are looking forward to getting your war on should HRC be elected.
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1612222/ex-cia-chief-leon-panetta-latest-stab-barack-obama-print

Headline: Ex-CIA chief Leon Panetta is latest to stab Barack Obama in print
Sub-headline: Ex-CIA chief follows former cabinet members Gates and Clinton in using memoir to paint a still-serving president as not warlike enough

That claim is both baseless and false. I have a reasonably well developed sense of the morality and ethics of just and unjust war, aggression, intervention, counter-intervention, etc. I would be interested to learn more about the actual work of CNAS, and whether or not any of their work includes any critical discussion of the justification for or against US policy and action on the world stage -- which is something that is glaringly absent in just about any present discussion of US foreign policy that I'm aware of.

You, apparently, know all you need to know, or care to know, about the subject. Fine with me. If you'd like to free-associate any more speculations about what I "doubtless" believe, please be my guest.

Also from the OP link in the International New York Times:

The center is led by two former Pentagon officials in the Clinton administration. Its board includes former Defense Secretary William J. Perry, the chairman, and former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright and John Podesta, the former White House chief of staff. And, indeed, Mrs. Clinton delivered the keynote address at the center’s inaugural forum in Washington today.

Mrs. Clinton’s remarks today were mostly in this centrist vein, repeating her call for alliance-building and robust international diplomacy, an expansion of the size of the Army, and a withdrawal of many American troops from Iraq (while leaving a remaining force that would battle Al Qaeda and pursue other priorities there).

Readers' comments:

1.“(W)hile leaving a remaining force that would battle Al Qaeda and PURSUE OTHER PRIORITIES THERE).” Emphasis mine.

What are those other priorities, Hillary? Can you be clear with us on that? I think this recurring statement of open-ended Iraq policy from Clinton says a lot about where her allegiances might actually lie. First off, it’s a clear signal to AIPAC that should she be elected, her administration could be counted on to pursue the largely Israeli-guided policies of continued containment in Iraq, long after America has grown weary of a strategically harmful engagement there, not to mention what it implies about a possible containment policy for Iran — another largely irrelevant stratagem in our geopolitical landscape. See “The MIddle of Nowhere” by Edward Luttwak in the May Issue of “Prospect” (excerpted in the July Harper’s) for a broader discussion of this issue.

2.Hillary doesn’t need a think tank at this point, she needs to get acqainted with the basics.

Is a vital national security interest threatened?
Do we have a clear attainable objective?
Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
Is the action supported by the American people?
Do we have genuine broad international support?
That’s the Powell Doctrine.
And finally, don’t fabricate pretexts to get the nation into war. And if you do, don’t retaliate against those who call you on it.

3. Hillary’s think tank is a slight variation of the neocon think tanks that aim to Americanize the world and get us into more Iraqs. I hope Hillary can explain to us why we need troops left in Iraq. Maybe she can also explain why we need to increase the size of the military. To do what? The problems we are meeting in the Islamic world need political solutions and not military ones. What is her political and diplomatic strategy?