Thoughts on US Foreign Policy?
Positive
Side Score: 4
|
 |
Negative
Side Score: 4
|
|
|
|
|
Positive … with reservations. However I can't be positive about Trump's Foreign Policy since it doesn't even RESEMBLE ANY American Foreign Policy. It's a dangerous entity most Americans would LOVE to exterminate! Hopefully, we will, shortly, before it wrecks the world! Side: Positive
|
2
points
US foreign policy is insanely aggressive and it has been since the end of WW2. Nobody would have any problem with America if it kept its troops on its own shores. Of course, that isn't what you do when your only dedication in life is trying to rule the world for as long as possible before your empire eventually meets the exact same fate as all empires. Side: Negative
It would be very good if the US had a foreign policy. As it is, we regularly go to war, impose a tariff, impose a sanction etc whenever a given President believes we should. Since our President regularly changes, our foreign policy regularly changes, and in no standard manner. Hard to call that a policy. Side: Negative
@Amarel Okay, point taken. More directly, what do you think about the US presence in the Middle East, parts of Africa, (and elsewhere?)? It seems much of US presence in the Middle East is functioning as a foreign Police Force to control internal disputes that may become a serious threat to America's homeland if not resolved. Effort to train these local populations internal defense force (military, police, otherwise) have proven almost completely ineffective, if not counter-productive. Is the US intending on being a foreign Military Police in the Middle East & elsewhere nearly indefinitely? Does that help defend the homeland? Does it help defend the civilians rooted inside of the internal conflict? Are there other driving motivating factors behind US Military policy? What should be the next steps forward? Side: Negative
I am sympathetic to the argument that problems elsewhere become problems here when not resolved over there. But often, these problems would not be the US's alone. We have allies and many of them have problems due to unresolved foreign issues. So here's what I would do. I would slowly remove our troops and bases from friendly territory, such as Japan and places in Europe. The slow downsize would be designed to give host nations time to build up their own forces. Then they can begin to shoulder the burden. The US has been the world police since WWII, that's why we are so often engaged, and that is why people dislike us. Bringing trusted nations into the role of police will diffuse the hatred of the policed, and will lessen the financial and moral burden of the US. The world is a state of anarchy, and in need of police. The US has been filling that role, and not uncommonly we fuck it up. The US needs a stable, stated foreign policy to guide future international conduct, and our allies need to play a larger role in foreign affairs whether their own, or issues of mutual interest. Part of a stated US foreign policy should be the elimination of half measures. A conflict needs to have a stated goal. All assets should be brought to bear swiftly and surely to attain the goal quickly and decisively. A policy like this would be most humane in the long run and would give the executive some serious pause before engaging in pet battles for election points. Side: Positive
|
