"Democrats always assure us that deterrence will work, but when the time comes to deter, they're against it"
About this Quote
It is classic Coulter: a one-sentence prosecutorial brief designed to make a policy argument feel like a character flaw. The line turns “deterrence” from a contested strategic doctrine into a simple moral test - and then claims Democrats flunk it every time. The real move is definitional. “Deterrence” here doesn’t mean the broader logic of preventing aggression; it’s coded as willingness to use force, fund the military, or project credibility through threats. Once deterrence is narrowed to hawkishness, the punchline becomes inevitable: if you hesitate about war, you were never serious about deterrence.
The subtext is partisan anthropology. “Always assure us” paints Democrats as lecturing elites, confident in theory but allergic to consequences. “When the time comes” cues a familiar conservative narrative about liberals collapsing under pressure: principled in the seminar, timid at the trigger. “They’re against it” is deliberately vague, allowing the listener to plug in whatever episode they’re already angry about - Iraq votes, Afghanistan timelines, Syria’s “red line,” sanctions, defense budgets.
Context matters because Coulter’s brand is rhetorical compression: take complicated civil-military debates and translate them into a betrayal story. The quote isn’t trying to map what deterrence actually requires (alliances, signaling, economic power, escalation control). It’s trying to foreclose that complexity by implying a pattern of bad faith. Its effectiveness comes from the bait-and-switch: it poses as a strategic critique, but it lands as an indictment of temperament.
The subtext is partisan anthropology. “Always assure us” paints Democrats as lecturing elites, confident in theory but allergic to consequences. “When the time comes” cues a familiar conservative narrative about liberals collapsing under pressure: principled in the seminar, timid at the trigger. “They’re against it” is deliberately vague, allowing the listener to plug in whatever episode they’re already angry about - Iraq votes, Afghanistan timelines, Syria’s “red line,” sanctions, defense budgets.
Context matters because Coulter’s brand is rhetorical compression: take complicated civil-military debates and translate them into a betrayal story. The quote isn’t trying to map what deterrence actually requires (alliances, signaling, economic power, escalation control). It’s trying to foreclose that complexity by implying a pattern of bad faith. Its effectiveness comes from the bait-and-switch: it poses as a strategic critique, but it lands as an indictment of temperament.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Ann
Add to List



