Foreign Policy by Twitter

Among those I follow on Twitter is Chris Murphy, the junior senator from my state of Connecticut.  Murphy's Twitter feed should charitably be described as inane.  He is always thrilled to visit some place or another in the state or he was honored to have breakfast with some group celebrating National Potato Week or another event of that significance.  Those tweets are best called "Twitter spam".  Then there are the tweets in which Murphy actually tries to lay out foreign policy ideas.  You know, Murphy tells the world about the War on Terror in 140 characters or less.  He would, no doubt, claim that he is relating big ideas in small sentences.  In truth, however, what he spouts is insipid drivel that Murphy thinks insightful.

I realized just how silly most of the Murphy foreign policy tweets are when I got this one earlier today:
              

"On areas where Rs and Ds agree post-midterms. If we disengage from challenges abroad they may well find us here at home"

 

Think about that for a moment.  He starts with the issue of disengaging from challenges abroad.  What exactly does that mean?  ISIS certainly presents a challenge abroad.  Of course, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is another challenge.  The rise of the Chinese economic hegemony in Asia is still another challenge.  Hunger around the world is another challenge.  The war in Afghanistan is yet an additional challenge.  How about global warming; is that a challenge?  And what about poverty and crime in Latin America leading to an avalanche of illegal immigration to the USA; is that a challenge?  So we have all of these and many more challenges abroad.  So far, Murphy really hasn't said much.

 

The senator then goes on to proclaim that if we disengage from these challenges, they may, MAY, find us at home.  Murphy doesn't even have the courage to say that these challenges will find us at home if we withdraw from dealing with them.  He leaves it as they "may" find us here, and certainly they might not.  So does that mean that Murphy is in favor of engaging in confronting these challenges?  He doesn't say, but we know already that the answer is no to some of them.  Murphy supports withdrawal of all American troops from Afghanistan.  So much for that challenge.  Murphy does not want any American troops or even further air strikes fighting ISIS absent a congressional authorization.  Of course, he has not bothered to introduce a measure containing such an authorization because Murphy likes to talk rather than do anything. 

 

Then there is the third part of Murphy's deep thought in the tweet.  "Rs and Ds agree!"  Hallelujah!  What utter nonsense.  How many Democrats want to avoid confrontation with ISIS, with Russia, with China, etc.  How many Republicans agree with that analysis?  Do Rs and Ds agree on how to engage the challenge of illegal immigration? 

 

Without a doubt, Murphy must think that these tweets really add something to the debate.  The truth is that the only thing they add is demonstrable proof of diminished capacity.