A brand new U.S. foreign policy

Maybe it is time for the US to re-think their foreign policy. I mean, Washington is now one of the world’s leading oil producers and therefore doesn’t need to go around prostrating itself to a number of corrupt, extremist regimes. It’s time to stop coddling these countries to gain access to a resource that we now have in abundance.

I’ve been complaining about the US foreign policy for decades and it has gotten worse in the last 10 years than ever before.

For centuries the White House occupants have been touring the world promoting the false flag of democracy while the country was relatively safe from outside attacks. Those days are gone and so should the out dated foreign policy that America lives by.

President Barack Obama calls foreign leaders in the Oval Office of the White House
President Barack Obama calls foreign leaders in the Oval Office of the White House 1/26/09.
The US is stuck in a World War II mindset with a sprinkling of the Cold War thrown in for good measure. Part of the American public eye still believes that throwing a massive invasion force at an enemy will send them packing. Let’s look at that way of thinking, shall we? Korea was a stalemate, Vietnam was a disaster, and now the Middle East has become a quagmire of violence. All this is the result of a faulty foreign policy. The only successes that can be pointed out was Ronald Reagan’s invasion of the tiny Island of Grenada, while George H. W. Bush had his only sudden with the invasion of a long time friend, Panama. Neither shows a successful application of what I’d define a ‘good’ foreign policy.

So far, since the end of World War II and the defeat of the Allies, the success rate of American foreign policy gets a resounding “F”, so that, with all these failures, maybe now would be a good time to re-think our part in the grand scheme of the world.

The questions are: do we really need to be present on every continent?  Do we really need a defense budget that would keep 10 or 12 third world countries going?  Is war really the answer to solving international problems and situations?

I’ve been considering just what a new foreign policy would look like. This is evidently a daunting task, but after lots of coffee and a little eye strain I found something that I could be happy with if it was to be put into action. It comes from Rep. Chris Murphy and the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC):

Principles for a forward-looking foreign policy:

    1. Military spending shouldn’t be 10 times our foreign aid budget. We need a new Marshall Plan for at-risk regions.
    2. America is stronger when it works through international organizations and broad multilateral coalitions.
    3. When military action is needed, we need clear goals, clear exit strategies, and congressional approval – always.
    4. Military action is not worthwhile without a realistic political strategy to clean up the mess once the fighting ends.
    5. It’s time to reign in the massive covert operations and intelligence apparatus that has emerged since 9-11. Mass surveillance and drone strikes, unchecked, steal moral authority from America.
    6. We need to practice what we preach on international human rights. No more secret detention centers. A categorical rejection of torture.
    7. Strength at home matters. We can’t talk about economic empowerment overseas if millions of Americans still live in poverty.
    8. Climate change is a national security threat. Combating this threat should be interwoven into every aspect of American foreign policy.

Time for new thinking and new people to carry out whatever the foreign policy is. We are no longer protected by two large oceans and we can no longer afford the arrogance of the class of ’47.

California Drought Dry Riverbed 2009
A dry riverbed in California.
Reform will not work. Change is the only way to find a way and a foreign policy that will protect the US and keep its people safe.  The complexion of warfare has changed and foreign policy must change with the times. Backward thinking won’t be the key to achieving peace and security. Diplomacy can do more good than a gun.

To quote John Lennon:”Give peace a chance”.


Op-ed from the tortured mind of an aspiring Chuq.


5 Comments Add yours

  1. Reblogged this on OK, Fine. and commented:
    Re-blog from Legationes.

    legationes – Latin, plural of legatio

    legatio – ambassador (office), embassy

    related word: legation

    1. a diplomatic minister, especially one below the rank of ambassador, and their staff.
    2. archaic – the position or office of legate; a legateship.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. lobotero says:

      Thanx for the re-blog……

      Liked by 1 person

  2. lobotero says:

    Reblogged this on In Saner Thought and commented:
    A recent op-ed I wrote for Legationes…….a fine group that gave this writer a shot…..please help support them by visiting daily……you will not be disappointed….

    I have been calling for a new approach to foreign policy our present team is failing miserably……

    I would like to thank the team at Legationes for giving me the opportunity to expand my thoughts worldwide……chuq


  3. GM says:

    Needless to say, yet another really interesting article.

    Somewhere I read that “America is a religion that doesn’t have the means of its creed “.
    Certainly, a new attitude toward foreign policy would not hurt.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. lobotero says:

      Thanx……the US needs to move past the Cold War……and face situations of the 21st century…..

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s