Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US Foreign Policy Big Picture *Must Read*

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • US Foreign Policy Big Picture *Must Read*

    http://www.aei.org/news/newsID.19912/news_detail.asp

    I thought this was brilliant. It didn't change my mind about Bush's Foreign Policy but it is very convincing. It lays out the differing ideological positions on foreign policy that have all been expressed at this forum. Check out the links to the foreign policy speeches too, an excellent source.

    Here's some of it:

    Yes, as in Germany and Japan, the undertaking is enormous, ambitious and arrogant. It may yet fail. But we cannot afford not to try. There is not a single, remotely plausible, alternative strategy for attacking the monster behind 9/11. It’s not Osama bin Laden; it is the cauldron of political oppression, religious intolerance, and social ruin in the Arab-Islamic world--oppression transmuted and deflected by regimes with no legitimacy into virulent, murderous anti-Americanism. It’s not one man; it is a condition. It will be nice to find that man and hang him, but that’s the cops-and-robbers law-enforcement model of fighting terrorism that we tried for twenty years and that gave us 9/11. This is war, and in war arresting murderers is nice. But you win by taking territory—and leaving something behind. :flag:

  • #2
    Good article Sharp, terrorism is indeed hard to fight. This little adventure in Iraq may still turn into a debacle, but, IMHO this is a whole lot better than doing nothing at all.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Sharpe
      http://www.aei.org/news/newsID.19912/news_detail.asp

      I thought this was brilliant. It didn't change my mind about Bush's Foreign Policy but it is very convincing. It lays out the differing ideological positions on foreign policy that have all been expressed at this forum. Check out the links to the foreign policy speeches too, an excellent source.

      Here's some of it:

      Yes, as in Germany and Japan, the undertaking is enormous, ambitious and arrogant. It may yet fail. But we cannot afford not to try. There is not a single, remotely plausible, alternative strategy for attacking the monster behind 9/11. It’s not Osama bin Laden; it is the cauldron of political oppression, religious intolerance, and social ruin in the Arab-Islamic world--oppression transmuted and deflected by regimes with no legitimacy into virulent, murderous anti-Americanism. It’s not one man; it is a condition. It will be nice to find that man and hang him, but that’s the cops-and-robbers law-enforcement model of fighting terrorism that we tried for twenty years and that gave us 9/11. This is war, and in war arresting murderers is nice. But you win by taking territory—and leaving something behind. :flag:

      Who supprted these illegitimate regimes for their own purpose during the Cold War? That whole article is not worth wiping my anus on!
      Not lip service, nor obsequious homage to superiors, nor servile observance of forms and customs...the Australian army is proof that individualism is the best and not the worst foundation upon which to build up collective discipline - General Monash

      Comment


      • #4
        Mah, I skipped through the article but found so many flaws that I don't think I need to read it entirely. For example it defines an empire solely as the desire to aquire new terrain and that therefor the USA cant be an empire. Stupid, a far better definition would be if you have influence on a countries policy or control over its resources and here the USA clearly fints into the role of an empire.

        Or how he defines (clintons) multilateralism as "a mania for treaties" and that treaties are worthless anyway. So yeah, why not break off all diplomatic bounds if they are useless and lets get back to might makes right... pfff.
        "The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose."

        Henry Alfred Kissinger

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Kraut
          Mah, I skipped through the article but found so many flaws that I don't think I need to read it entirely. For example it defines an empire solely as the desire to aquire new terrain and that therefor the USA cant be an empire. Stupid, a far better definition would be if you have influence on a countries policy or control over its resources and here the USA clearly fints into the role of an empire.

          Or how he defines (clintons) multilateralism as "a mania for treaties" and that treaties are worthless anyway. So yeah, why not break off all diplomatic bounds if they are useless and lets get back to might makes right... pfff.
          Obviously, this article was not neutral (that's Charles Krauthammer after all ). But it is interesting, although very intellectual at the same time.

          The guy frames the three other "ideologies" (Realism, Liberal Internationalism and Isolationism) in a way that makes Democratic Realism the only logical choice.

          I believe though that his democratic realism is much closer to realism that he wants to admit. The difference between the two is only one of interpretation. He is saying that democratic realism is first and foremost a foreign policy marked by a will to promote the values of freedom and democracy, which is indeed a departure from strict realism only concerned by national power and interests. However, to answer cynics who are saying that US promotes freedom and democracy only in some places and let the other places rot in hell, he is saying that "we will support democracy everywhere, but we will commit blood and treasure only in places where there is a strategic necessity". So we are back again to the good old criterion of national power and interests.

          Comment


          • #6
            The damn problem with all this is the will to try to fit the reality under an ideology or a theory.

            I have a Bachelor in political science and believe me I had to study a lot of ideologies during my years of studies, from one extreme of the political spectrum to the other. At first, you are excited about reading them, whether its conservatism, liberalism or anything else, because they do offer at first glance some kind of organized way of understanding our world. You think you are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. Well, that is until you read about the next ideology, which has also its own way of explaining our reality, which as good as the previous ideology.

            The problem is that all ideologies, when taken objectively at face value and when you exclude other arguments, do explain the world in usually a persuasive way...

            So after a while I have concluded that the reason ideologies are always able to explain the world and structure it their way is simply because the reality, the real world in which we are living, is extremely complex, much more than our simple mind abstractions called ideologies. You can pick up facts of life here and there and succeed in building a structured and persuasive ideology where facts are supporting each other, but it will always be a truncated version of reality. You can always find contradictory facts that will come demolish your ideology (this is why ideologues usually ignore or stay silent on the facts that contradict their position).

            Our world has its own rhythm and does not obey to the intellectual models the humans are constructing on paper. This is why personnally I am always very skeptic about any ideological proposition or position. And this is why I am not ashamed to pick up ideas and positions all across the political spectrum, because at times, some ideologies are better positioned to explain things than others (and then 10 years after it may be wholly different).

            That's probably why I probably come across sometimes as some kind of skeptic centrist, but I can be very conservative on some aspects, and very liberal on others...

            Comment


            • #7
              Tzar what you say is all true, but at the end of the day your ideas and reasoning has to fit in with societal norms and reasoning. What do you do about that?

              BTW what is your occupation/career ATM?
              Not lip service, nor obsequious homage to superiors, nor servile observance of forms and customs...the Australian army is proof that individualism is the best and not the worst foundation upon which to build up collective discipline - General Monash

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Temujin
                Tzar what you say is all true, but at the end of the day your ideas and reasoning has to fit in with societal norms and reasoning. What do you do about that?
                Like I said, I pick up and promote political and social ideas from all sides if I feel they really addresses the current problems of our world. That's my only guide, believing it can really address successfully the problematics of our world. I don't care if it comes from the left or the right.

                People with ideologies instantly rejects ideas coming from the other side as inherently flawed because they are not in line with their own thinking. A hard core conservative will rarely accept ideas coming from a liberalist even if at face value it could make sense since it is "against" his ideology. It's basically like religion, you need to accept to lose part of your judgement when you adhere strictly to an ideology or a religion.

                BTW what is your occupation/career ATM?
                I am Associate Producer for a large video game developer and publisher.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tzar
                  Like I said, I pick up and promote political and social ideas from all sides if I feel they really addresses the current problems of our world. That's my only guide, believing it can really address successfully the problematics of our world. I don't care if it comes from the left or the right.

                  People with ideologies instantly rejects ideas coming from the other side as inherently flawed because they are not in line with their own thinking. A hard core conservative will rarely accept ideas coming from a liberalist even if at face value it could make sense since it is "against" his ideology. It's basically like religion, you need to accept to lose part of your judgement when you adhere strictly to an ideology or a religion.

                  I am Associate Producer for a large video game developer and publisher.
                  Yeah i understand what your saying, i look at it in the same way. The question i asked probably only relates to someone who is in the field professionally. As in, if you worked amongst others with a similar educational background in a politically orientated job.

                  However with your current employment its an irrelevant question.

                  Relating to ideologies i prefer the sliding scale approach, you don't have to hold the views of a particular ideology but you have a position on the scale which you occupy. So you must be a temujinist sorry had a couple too many beers!
                  Not lip service, nor obsequious homage to superiors, nor servile observance of forms and customs...the Australian army is proof that individualism is the best and not the worst foundation upon which to build up collective discipline - General Monash

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Tzar
                    The damn problem with all this is the will to try to fit the reality under an ideology or a theory.

                    I have a Bachelor in political science and believe me I had to study a lot of ideologies during my years of studies, from one extreme of the political spectrum to the other. At first, you are excited about reading them, whether its conservatism, liberalism or anything else, because they do offer at first glance some kind of organized way of understanding our world. You think you are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. Well, that is until you read about the next ideology, which has also its own way of explaining our reality, which as good as the previous ideology.

                    The problem is that all ideologies, when taken objectively at face value and when you exclude other arguments, do explain the world in usually a persuasive way...

                    So after a while I have concluded that the reason ideologies are always able to explain the world and structure it their way is simply because the reality, the real world in which we are living, is extremely complex, much more than our simple mind abstractions called ideologies. You can pick up facts of life here and there and succeed in building a structured and persuasive ideology where facts are supporting each other, but it will always be a truncated version of reality. You can always find contradictory facts that will come demolish your ideology (this is why ideologues usually ignore or stay silent on the facts that contradict their position).

                    Our world has its own rhythm and does not obey to the intellectual models the humans are constructing on paper. This is why personnally I am always very skeptic about any ideological proposition or position. And this is why I am not ashamed to pick up ideas and positions all across the political spectrum, because at times, some ideologies are better positioned to explain things than others (and then 10 years after it may be wholly different).

                    That's probably why I probably come across sometimes as some kind of skeptic centrist, but I can be very conservative on some aspects, and very liberal on others...
                    See Hofstadter: Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid, won't be an easy reading
                    a brain cell

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by laszlo.nemedi
                      See Hofstadter: Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid, won't be an easy reading
                      I heard that was supposed to be a great book, though I never ran across it.
                      I have no problem at all with being proved wrong. Especially when being proved wrong leaves the world a better place, than being proved right...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Temujin
                        Who supprted these illegitimate regimes for their own purpose during the Cold War?
                        Everyone who thought winning that war was vital to our survival. It is debatable whether or not the policies and actions of the powers were necessary to end the struggle. Yet, what is not debatable is who've benefited from the war's end. If it weren't for the end of the Cold War, Europe would still be divided, and most of us would be approving millions of dollars to teach our children how to "duck and cover" just so they can sleep better.

                        It is difficult to embrace the ends without justifying the means.

                        As for the article itself, it is biased, but well written. As Tzar stated, it ends up contradicting itself when you read it carefully.
                        "As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy."-Christopher Dawson - The Judgement of Nations, 1942

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Out of USA domination, no Salute. We must be proud to be 2nd zone citizen under The USA umbrella. Europe is crap, France and Germany traitors, Muslim barbarians,
                          The USA is the banner holder for The Civilisation and Only true democracy.

                          I took time to read it twice.

                          The only rule is the one of the stronger to impose its vision to all the rest of world.

                          Boys when China will reach its full strengh it will be hell on Earth and probably the 1st & last war between them and USA.
                          The true global extinction of human race.

                          My god protect me from my Friends, I took in charge my enemies

                          Der WanderDismayed
                          The Best weapon ever:a good Joke. The Best shield ever: Humour
                          JLBETIN© Aka Der Wanderer TOAW Section Leader is a █ WHQ/SZO/XG/Gamesquad® product since 01/2003
                          The Birth of European Army Tournament round Three is opened

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by jlbetin
                            Out of USA domination, no Salute. We must be proud to be 2nd zone citizen under The USA umbrella. Europe is crap, France and Germany traitors, Muslim barbarians,
                            The USA is the banner holder for The Civilisation and Only true democracy.

                            I took time to read it twice.

                            The only rule is the one of the stronger to impose its vision to all the rest of world.

                            Boys when China will reach its full strengh it will be hell on Earth and probably the 1st & last war between them and USA.
                            The true global extinction of human race.

                            My god protect me from my Friends, I took in charge my enemies

                            Der WanderDismayed
                            Yes Bow down to us Americans. You people should be grateful to see our backside.

                            Seriously, if America half of how we see ourselves, the world would gladly support us. The truth is Americans are like so many people around the world who want solutions, and don't ask how its achieved.

                            Like Tzar, I studied many forms of political and social ideals in college. My only thought, "is this the best we can come up with?"

                            Earth under man is the ghetto of the universe, which is why aliens just fly-by.
                            "As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy."-Christopher Dawson - The Judgement of Nations, 1942

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Deltapooh
                              Yes Bow down to us Americans. You people should be grateful to see our backside.

                              Seriously, if America half of how we see ourselves, the world would gladly support us. The truth is Americans are like so many people around the world who want solutions, and don't ask how its achieved.

                              Like Tzar, I studied many forms of political and social ideals in college. My only thought, "is this the best we can come up with?"

                              Earth under man is the ghetto of the universe, which is why aliens just fly-by.
                              No I'm in travel study for the account of a great superior civilisation, the Damned Froggies, which prepare themselves to invade Earth using their most secret Massive Destruction Weapon, the GARLIC SNAIL

                              But Chutttttt, it is a secret keep it with you

                              Der WanderSpy
                              The Best weapon ever:a good Joke. The Best shield ever: Humour
                              JLBETIN© Aka Der Wanderer TOAW Section Leader is a █ WHQ/SZO/XG/Gamesquad® product since 01/2003
                              The Birth of European Army Tournament round Three is opened

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X