there is not much of a debate. Already Hillary is critical of Obama's weak
"do nothing" policy and the current condition of the world on fire is
evidence enough that a weak disengaged America only leads to the bad guys
becoming more aggressive and threatening. Peace through strenght continues to
echo through the decades since Reagan penned it. Teddy Roosevelt walk
softly but carry a BIG stick also reminds us of the need for strength -
overwhelming strength. Obama is wrong - has never been right and no one is
willing to defend his backwards foreign policy. Running and deserting is not a
foreign policy. It is abandonment. Imagine Hilter facing a policy like we have
today. YOu would see the Nazi flag flying over the US capitial today.
Your statement that President Obama's foreign policy is in a state of free
fall is ludicrous and ridiculous. It really is. Must you always parrot the far
Hey Thid Baker –“I did look it up and . . . the only
foreigners who love him are ISIS and Al Qaida. “That is a
COMPLETE falsehood.You are used to referencing Lying Right Wing
Websites, and you're not going to find any real information there.“Obama Most Popular Leader” - New York Times, May 29, 2009“Many publics around the world have confidence in President Obama
to do the right thing in world affairs. At least half in 24 of the 39 countries
surveyed give the American leader high marks . . . “ Pew Research, July
18 2013“Though his popularity is down from its peak in 2009,
President Obama remains the world’s most popular leader among the
world’s citizens” – The National Memo September 4, 2013Obama and the Pope top list of world leaders on Twitter Christian
Science Monitor June 26, 2014The Most Popular Leader in Canada is
. . . Obama Yahoo News, August 11, 2014In other words,
“Conservative” claims of Obama’s alleged unpopularity around
the world are COMPLETELY FALSE.. . . . No surprise there.
The Middle East has multiple infections that can flare up with little notice.
The DN implies that Obama should have the answer to the Middle East. When has
the US ever had the answer to problems in the Middle East. Not 10 years ago,
not 20 years ago, not 30 years ago. It is not that simple.
Most present conflicts worldwide are funded by petrodollars. End our dependence
on fossil fuels and we end the conflicts. We have the technology to do this, and
it's cheaper than lurching from one war to another. There's simply no
downside to ditching fossil fuels. The time to do it is now.
@The Educator "Surely, over the course of 6 years, he's done something
right, hasn't he?"Yeah, you would think, right?To be
this wrong, this oftenIs a special gift.
@ Gary O: "Obama is STILL the most popular world leader in the eyes of World
Citizens, and GW Bush was REVILED by this same group. Look it up."I did look it up and Obama's approval numbers are at record lows (around
30% approval) in America and the only foreigners who love him are ISIS and Al
Qaida. They never had it so good since Obama took office! They felt very
different about President Bush however!@ Maverick. You know
don't you that jijhadists have vowed to fly their flag over the White House
and kill every Christian in the world? What do you think we should do to defend
ourselves? Pretend they don't exist?
Out of curiosity, has the dnews gone more than 2 days without criticizing the
President?Surely, over the course of 6 years, he's done
something right, hasn't he?
Former President Bush squandered America's standing in the world, trillions
of dollars, and thousands of American soldiers in his personal agenda in Iraq,
allowing militant organizations to gain a foothold around the world from which
America and President Obama have yet to heal from. American dominance in
education, public health, research, and even social services to stabilize the
middle class have all declined with our growing inequality in our Country. With
conservative politics swayed towards less fairness and towards profit, America
can no longer hold the global cards as the mainstay of the American middle class
becomes smaller and smaller. The foreign policy goals of America still require
a reordering of policies and perhaps being more open to our new Pope
Francis's call for caring for others and the welfare of our planet may be
the best place to start.
As "David King" suggests; our foreign policy police actions (or lack
thereof)MIGHT be a way that liberals and conservatives can agree - for once!Why should we continue to be the worlds policeman? (disregarding of
course, the fact that John "lets have a war" McCain thinks we should
invade everybody/anybody that talks "mean" to us?For all
intents and purposes Europe is bankrupt, (at least militarily)IF Russia does
decide to invade Ukraine - they won't have much pushback from Europe, but
then, Europe WILL hope the U.S. does all the heavy lifting as we've always
done anyway!What SHOULD happen is that the U.S. make energy
dependency a foreign policy and military issue.Why not spend some of the
billions/trillions that we are spending on the military to become more energy
independent?Basically the reason we have such a presence in the Middle
East is to guarantee the flow of oil.What if we could END that
dependence?Wouldn't that make BOTH liberals and conservatives
like myself happy that we could simply disregard all the tribal wars in the
middle east and save some money while we're doing it?
Repubs, for a political party which touts "small government" and
"less intrusion" you sure do like to get us involved in every country in
the world.Why can't we stop intruding in the middle-east? Why
do we feel an addiction to constantly he meddling over there?
That was quite a slanted diatribe against President Obama, don’t you
think?“Indeed, the Obama administration has seemed to stumble
from one crisis to the next . . . “Really? Well, even so,
that’s a much better record than the record of the previous Republican
administration who seemed to CREATE one crisis after another.Face
it, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the Middle East if GW Bush and his
certitudinous Republican administration had not committed an unprovoked assault
and occupation of Iraq, killed over a hundred thousand of their people, and
completely destabilized the Middle East for years, possibly decades, to come.If you’re wondering about American foreign policy, perhaps we
should ask the people who are most affected by it . . . The citizens of the
world.Obama is STILL the most popular world leader in the eyes of
World Citizens, and GW Bush was REVILED by this same group. Look it up.That should tell us something about the viability and worth of foreign policy
The mixed up world of conflict is not the fault of Obama / Hillary Clinton /
Kerry as it is the fault of mixed up world governments. And the US needs not be
the military policeman everywhere any more. I am a Viet Nam vet, I thought I
was serving my country, after I got there and then back home, I protested that
war in the public square and I applauded Kerry telling the Senate back then what
a mess.Today the US needs to be the world's example of good
democratic government, not the top gun. The Ukraine is clearly not our problem.
Afghanistan is clearly a problem of nobody can be in charge. Pakistan, gimme a
break, they've lost their brain. Iraq is clearly stumbling but maybe
there's a light in that tunnel. Egypt needs to practice democracy. ISIL
is a rag tag rabble rouser.And here in the US our gov't is stymied by
tea partiers. And the rich get richer. Our Congress needs term limits in order
to be a representative gov't. And be a good example.
I think I'll go with Obama's "ambiguous" foreign policy rooted
in avoiding more war and boots on the ground over Bush's "clear"
foreign policy of "war on terror" that left us in two costly, and unpaid
for, wars that helped drive the American economy off the cliff and has created
much of the chaos we see in the Mideast today. Yes, I know we need
Mideast oil to preserve our American "way of life." Can't allow
domestic renewable energy development to hurt "jobs" in the fossil fuels
and military sectors. Just how "our oil" got under the Mideast's
lands is baffling. But we'll continue to fight for it... while President
Bush paints portraits.
I consider myself pretty conservative politically. In fact, I've been
labeled as "extreme right wing" before for my comments, but foreign
policy is not an area where I think President Obama deserves a lot of criticism.
"Don't do stupid stuff" isn't a bad place to start when it
comes to foreign policy. My main criticism would be Obama's continuation
of certain Bush-era policies, like re-upping the Patriot Act. We
conservatives love to talk about small government, but often fail to realize
that an attitude of perpetual warfare encourages government overreach at home
and costs tons of money. The most negative consequence is the loss of human
life, something that any "pro-lifer" should reject. It's a real
tragedy that the neoconservative movement has convinced us that unless a US
soldier is dying somewhere, we have a "weak" foreign policy.
What foreign policy? When did we will see what happens become policy. But then
the Presidency is junior varsity so it fits.
American presidential election are never determined by foreign policy unless the
country is actually at war.I would also like to point out that all
of the critics who have been carping about President Obama's Middle East
policies have been wrong on every single prediction they previously made about
the Iraq war. The truth is that absolutely no one knows what will or won't
"Each foreign crisis demands a singular response, but each response should
be consistent with principles outlined in a coherent governing policy."Oh by all means let's get back to a "big think" foreign
policy, like "make the world safe for democracy," which gave us the
wholly unnecessary WWI, which set the stage for Hitler and WWII. Let's
eliminate socialism, which gave us the equally unnecessary Cold War, which led
to Korea and the tragic Vietnam War. At let's not forget Middle Eastern
nation building which gave us the unnecessary Iraq War. I think Obama's
foreign policy is refreshingly different.But the foreign policy of
all administrations is driven by the need to sustain American capital which
keeps us from addressing the looming environmental crisis. Obama's foreign
policy is a nice change from what went before, but it can't escape from the
tracks left by previous administrations.
The dn basically excoriates Obama's lack of principled foreign policy while
at the same time stating that we as a nation should respond to foreign issues on
a case by case basis using proper "principles." As I read it, the dn
apparently does not know what a proper foreign policy should be. How about a
foreign policy that does not say that everything that happens around the world
is a matter of "national security?" How about a foreign policy that says
we have a sovereign nation and that the US Constitution is what we adhere to,
not some foreign or world law or political trick? How about we have a foreign
policy that says we are not going to put our lives and our treasure at risk for
nations that have no regard for us in the first place? How about it?