Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa (Post 4080289)

It would seem that over the last 8 years, U.S. Foreign Policy has morphed into a one dimensional concept involving who we can invade or generally fight against.

Originally Posted by Overpaid Slacker (Post 4080372)

It would seem you're not informed about US foreign policy -- beyond what MSM tells you (and tells you other people think of us).

We've had great successes in bilateral trade agreements with Latin America (except when our Congress has quashed them -- note, not the President, who supported bilateral trade agreements with Colombia, but folks like Nancy Pelosi). With Brazil, Colombia and Chile we've deepened economic and social ties and supported them in their fights against their own terrorists.

Our efforts to combat disease and support education and health programs throughout Africa have been very (thought not universally) successful. We've supported and assisted transitions to democracy in Ghana, Liberia, Mali and Mozambique. We brokered the Comprehensive Peace Agreement to end the civil war in Sudan.

We've achieved a strategic framework with an increasingly bellicose Russia. I assume you think we're somehow to blame for their harsh rhetoric and treating their neighbors as "spheres of influence" -- but we're not. And our alignment of interests instead of principles is nobody's fault. It's realpolitik.

We've engaged China on taking up its responsibilities in the global forum -- including to have them stop profiteering in genocide in Africa. China and Russia are the two prime examples of the parties whom you don't cajole or "diplomacy" into doing things, you engage and accept them as amoral competitors, b/c that's how they see you. They're not burdened with this post-modern guilt garbage and "oh gee, what will the world think?" navel-gazing. But they (and their fellow travellers) certainly know how to use that masochistic angst to paralyze certain Americans!

Syria is (nominally) out of Lebanon... and would actually be if the UN didn't effectively prevent their complete ouster. Qaddafi is playing ball. We're supporting democracy from Morocco to Pakistan, through means adapted to each situation. We aren't (nobody is) going to talk into Saudi Arabia and say some magic diplomacy words that will convince them to, overnight, get all liberated and hep. This "if only we were liked we'd get more results" crap is a triumph of ignorance over reality; over history. Hey, everybody loves the Swiss... how much to they dictate the global dialog or agenda?

Instead of acting "unilaterally" (cause that's the term for a coalition of more than thirty countries), we've engaged China, Russia, Japan and South Korea in handling the psychopath Kim Jong Il. We're close to a Northeast Asian Peace and Security Mechanism. Again, we didn't "make" Il or make him insane, but we're dealing with it as best we can -- diplomatically and multilaterally.

Bush supports expanding the Security Council of the UN ... which, while I have strong opinions about the inefficacy and hypocrisy of the UN, certainly bespeaks multilateralism and inclusion. We've continued to deepen our relationships with Brazil and India, as well as Indonesia and South Africa -- vast, multiethnic democracies whom we don't need to "push" on many issues. We've forgiven vast amounts of foreign debt to help developing countries get out from under leverage.

I realise that MSM isn't telling you every day that we've got great cultural, political and economic relations with much of the world, but we do. Our ties with Eastern Europe are potent and visceral.

Should we allow ourselves to be governed by foreign opinion -- or, more accurately, the opinion of a vocal and press-indulged minority? I don't have much faith your answer to that question is "no".

Look at the change in the heads of state in the much fellated and esteemed EU: Merkel and Sarkozy vs. Schroder and Chirac? And we're still hated? The world isn't "with us?" Grow up. We were attacked back when everybody loved us -- WTC bombings, USS Cole, etc. All pre-W, during this mythical halcyon period when the world loved us.

And there will always be those folks who will take shots at the US (1) to distract their people from what's actually wrong (the Mullahs); (2) for cheap political points (Chirac, Schroder and any pinhead sub-minister with a dream who gets near a microphone); and/or (3) because they have an adolescent love/hate relationship with the US and can't reconcile their own (real or perceived) inadequacies with our indifference to them.

Putting aside the McCain/Obama dichotomy (and that's too small a word). If anybody wants to run a foreign policy based on being liked, they're quite simply an idiot. Being liked can be a fortunate by-product of effective foreign policy, but it cannot be a material consideration, let alone the sine qua non.

JP

Originally Posted by Seahawk (Post 4080406)

Fifth. Please read up on McCain.

Sixth. Please give me one OB policy/bill/position. Just one.

Originally Posted by dipso (Post 4080433)

Introducing bills
On the December 18, 2006, edition of The Big Story, Fox News political analyst Dick Morris falsely claimed that Obama has "never introduced a bill" in Congress. In fact, according to the Library of Congress' THOMAS legislative database, Obama was the primary sponsor of 152 bills and resolutions introduced in the last Congress, including a bill (S.2125) that passed Congress on December 8, 2006, "to promote relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo," which he introduced on December 16, 2005. In addition, three nonbinding resolutions sponsored by Obama have passed the Senate, and 14 bills that he has co-sponsored have become law.

Obama has also introduced numerous other pieces of legislation. For example:

Introduced a bill (S.1194) directing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to establish guidelines for tracking spent fuel rods.
Introduced a bill (S.1426) extending provisions in the Safe Drinking Water Act that relate to preventing and detecting contamination.
Introduced a bill (S.1920) amending the Clean Air Act to establish a renewable diesel standard.
Introduced a bill (S.3988) improving benefits and services for members of the armed forces and veterans.
Still, a variation on the falsehood surfaced elsewhere. In a February 12 Politico article on Obama's "peevish" comments "accus[ing] the media of ignoring his substantive record and falsely depicting him as a lightweight," senior political writer Ben Smith claimed that Obama "hasn't sponsored any legislation that would affect the way Americans live their daily lives."

Originally Posted by Superman (Post 4080542)

Because you and I both know that has been our sole approach these last eight years.

Originally Posted by dipso (Post 4080525)

The last one should interest you.

Here is what the other guy does to vets.

May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.

April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.

March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.

March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes.

October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.

April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.

August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000. To his credit, he also voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, which he now supports making permanent, despite the dire financial condition this country is in, and despite the fact that he indicated in 2001 that these tax cuts unfairly benefited the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

Originally Posted by Superman (Post 4080542)

Effective foreign policy involves careful use of both the Carrot and the Stick. For the supporters of the current "administration" here to deny that the Carrot has been collecting dust while the Stick has seen non-stop use is.......either deluded or dishonest. We're hoping to have a meaningful dialog here. When you guys pretend that the current "administration" has been engaging in diplomacy, please also admit that your vision of diplomacy means whacking our enemies until they stop hating us. Because you and I both know that has been our sole approach these last eight years.

Originally Posted by Superman (Post 4080542)

Effective foreign policy involves careful use of both the Carrot and the Stick. For the supporters of the current "administration" here to deny that the Carrot has been collecting dust while the Stick has seen non-stop use is.......either deluded or dishonest. We're hoping to have a meaningful dialogue here. When you guys pretend that the current "administration" has been engaging in diplomacy, please also admit that your vision of diplomacy means whacking our enemies until they stop hating us. Because you and I both know that has been our sole approach these last eight years.

Originally Posted by rammstein (Post 4080388)

JP- that was a GREAT post. Bravo.

Originally Posted by Overpaid Slacker (Post 4080372)

I

Our ties with Eastern Europe are potent and visceral.


JP

Originally Posted by dipso (Post 4080525)

The last one should interest you.


SEAHAWK

This is the place to look. they have every vote ever cast.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/votes/

He is not the man he tries to make you think he is. I was looking at some of his votes as I was searching for these. I pasted the first four for you.
He is against all kinds of funding for the troops, for the vets, homeland security.
He definately doesn't want tax loopholes closed either.
Check him out.

Here is what the other guy does to vets.

May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.
5/4/06 Vote 111: H R 4939: Thune Amdt. No. 3704; To provide, with an offset, $20,000,000 for the Department of Veterans Affairs for Medical Facilities. No

April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.
4/26/06 Vote 98: H R 4939: Akaka Amdt. No. 3642 as Amended; To provide an additional $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. No

March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.
3/14/06 Vote 41: S CON RES 83: Akaka Amdt. No. 3007; To increase Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes. No

March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes.
3/16/06 Vote 63: S CON RES 83: Stabenow Amdt No. 3141; To provide an assured stream of funding for veteran's health care that will take into account the annual changes in the veteran's population and inflation to be paid for by restoring the pre-2001 top rate for income over $1 million, closing corporate tax loopholes and delaying tax cuts for the wealthy. No

October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.

April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.

August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000. To his credit, he also voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, which he now supports making permanent, despite the dire financial condition this country is in, and despite the fact that he indicated in 2001 that these tax cuts unfairly benefited the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class.