Skip to main content

View Diary: US Foreign Policy, We're the Cops of the world (46 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Acts vs. words (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    allenjo, Words In Action, aliasalias

    It's just not overly clear yet whether the transition has in fact been made.  There are ambiguous actions, actions that have yet to find historical contexts, actions that feel like works around the margins but not central, emphatic, transformational ones.   And there are still some puzzling inconsistencies in the words themselves.  One can understand why it may be necessary to speak unemphatically, but it's tough to deny that's what's happening.

    And one needn't listen to The Lesser Paul to be concerned.

    That's not projecting fear, that's from paying attention.  We may not differ in our facts, but it's possible to differ honorably about our interpretations of them.

    Historians will have their conclusions, long after we're gone.  It would be great to be certain now, but that's not how reality works.

    (-7.62,-7.33) Carbon footprint 12.6 metric tons. l'Enfer, c'est les autres.

    by argomd on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 01:20:09 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  not overly clear yet whether...... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Words In Action, aliasalias, argomd
      still some puzzling inconsistencies in the words themselves
      When we start closing military bases both around the globe and in the US, perhaps it will become clear to us, that the US is shifting away from all that global reach.

      When we see congress rallying around to close bases, cut MIC spending, demanding the War Department to pass an audit to start, (Barbara Lee has a bill pending on that, though I do not know who has signed on) and to account for the megabucks of taxpayer's money spent.

      Right now we have words, when what we need is action or this country will be destroyed by the out of control MIC.

      "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

      by allenjo on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 02:19:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And yet (0+ / 0-)
        When we start closing military bases both around the globe
        The NY Times reported that the pull out from Iraq was the largest withdrawal and movement of US forces since the end of the Vietnam War.

        And today, NPR is reporting about negotiations to turn over Bagram base in Afghanistan to the Afghan government.

        Is there any level of global base closings that would convince you that bases are being closed?

        The deployments in East Africa, btw, are in conjunction with the the Somaliland and Somalipuntland  governments, the African Union, Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, France, Germany, Russia and Denmark in accordance with a UN Security Council. I didn't argue that administration said it would become isolationist. I said its documents say it will no longer assume the role of sole policeman and will act internationally in accordance with its multilateral obligations, and the East African efforts are part of an international effort to stabilize Somalia -- an effort that has in fact worked because of its international nature, as evidence by the massive migration of the Somali diaspora back to Somalia.

        •  Don't want to answer for allenjo, but (0+ / 0-)

          Europe, South Korea, Japan (Okinawa), drone base in Saudi Arabia, et al.

          That plus an honest departure from Afghanistan with a clear acknowledgment of the mistakes made there -- oh, and utter frankness about the mistakes committed in entering Iraq.

          Please, oh, please don't go all 2nd amendment on me.  I disagree that the signals are unambiguous, not that some signals exist.  If you demand I accept all your points just because you say them, because your view of the evidence is the only tenable view, then you've ceded the power to persuade.

          Of course, you were responding to allenjo, not to me.  Sorry to interject myself.

          (-7.62,-7.33) Carbon footprint 12.6 metric tons. l'Enfer, c'est les autres.

          by argomd on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 07:08:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Case by case (0+ / 0-)

            Europe - doubt this will happen in my lifetime. US bases are part of the entire European security structure, which was once summarized as designed to keep the US and French in, the Germans down and the Russians out. I think a more doable goal is to have the Europeans pay for the US presence.

            South Korea - The administration and China are having discreet talks about long term Korean re-unification, which would allow the US to withdraw. With North Korea threatening nuclear war these days, it's probably not going to happen soon. Only Dennis Rodman can save us! But seriously, I do think that change in North Korea is much, much closer than it appears and that Kim Jong On is engaged in a power struggle against hardliners. Kim Jong On's young Chinese educated wife is on record saying she looks forward to the day when South Korean teachers are teaching in North Korea, and North Korea doesn't let ideas like that just slip out.

            Japan - One of the main reasons we are in Japan is because China wants us to be there. Despite the rhetoric, the main reason the US is in Japan isn't just to protect Japan. It's to prevent Japanese re-armament, the idea of which China and South Korea hate, by forestalling the need of the Japanese to have armed forces. Other Asian countries are worried that if Japan re-arms, it will once again become militaristic, despite the passing of several generations. I think it's possible that this could change but it's a very long term process that would require Japan, Korea and China to have some sort of mutual security arrangement. In the meantime, Japan should pay the costs.

            Saudi Arabia - entirely agree, this is doable in the short term. The Saudis don't need any protection, especially now that Iraq is a basket case.

            And I'm not saying anyone has to agree with me. I'm just suggesting that people closely read publicly available administration policy documents and judge for themselves whether objectively (1) the documents sketch out a multilateral collective security theory in which it is explicitly stated that the US is not the sole policeman and that security must be based on other governments, regional security organizations and the UN and (2) those documents predict and explain the administration's actions.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site