Today's discussion by president Obama of his foreign policy was missing certain very important pieces. Forget for the moment that Obama is in his sixth year as president and that it seems more than a bit late for him to outline his foreign policy agenda now. Let's just take the whole mess at face value.
First of all, what are the conditions under which the USA would use its military forces? This is not a question about Afghanistan where the military is already engaged. No, the question for Obama is when would America use soldiers and sailors elsewhere. Obama said nothing about this basic question.
Second, which areas of the world are included among those which are of national importance to the interests of the USA? Are there any areas that are peripheral to American interests? For example, under Obama's policy would America treat a threat to Uzbekistan the same as a threat to Uruguay, Uganda or the United Kingdom?
Neither of these are casual questions. If Obama was truly laying out his view of foreign policy, he would necessarily have to address both of these issues. Of course, if today's speech were merely an attempt to make it appear as if Obama has some sort of overall view of foreign policy (which he does not), then it makes little difference what he says. After all, in the view of the Obamacrats, the media will not bother to analyze what Obama said. It will be enough for the mainstream media just to report that Obama made a thoughtful speech. The Obamacrats think that most Americans are too dumb or disinterested to understand that Obama said nothing of import today.
Let's hope they have it wrong.
First of all, what are the conditions under which the USA would use its military forces? This is not a question about Afghanistan where the military is already engaged. No, the question for Obama is when would America use soldiers and sailors elsewhere. Obama said nothing about this basic question.
Second, which areas of the world are included among those which are of national importance to the interests of the USA? Are there any areas that are peripheral to American interests? For example, under Obama's policy would America treat a threat to Uzbekistan the same as a threat to Uruguay, Uganda or the United Kingdom?
Neither of these are casual questions. If Obama was truly laying out his view of foreign policy, he would necessarily have to address both of these issues. Of course, if today's speech were merely an attempt to make it appear as if Obama has some sort of overall view of foreign policy (which he does not), then it makes little difference what he says. After all, in the view of the Obamacrats, the media will not bother to analyze what Obama said. It will be enough for the mainstream media just to report that Obama made a thoughtful speech. The Obamacrats think that most Americans are too dumb or disinterested to understand that Obama said nothing of import today.
Let's hope they have it wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment