Policy whiplash
I’ve said it before but I want to say it again: one of the effects of the progression of US administrations of the 21st Century – Bush II followed by Obama followed by Trump followed by Biden – has been enormous reversals in a US foreign policy that used to be much more stable no matter which party was in power.
There were exceptions, of course, notable among them Vietnam. But still, there was a more basic majority bipartisan attitude, with hawk-dove variations but nevertheless a stability compared to now.
At this point I can’t imagine that anyone would trust the US no matter who’s in charge. The reversals have come fast and furious, the parties have alternated, and the world is realizing that the US is both weak and careening between two alternating points of view.
I saw a comment on this or another blog making the point that maybe distrust of the US will lead to a sort of enforced American isolation on the world stage. The person making that comment was happy about such a prospect. Although there’s something about it that attracts me as well, I see a huge danger. I’m far from a globalist, but I just don’t think isolation is possible in modern times. For better or for worse, what happens in the world affects us greatly. You can run, but you can’t hide.
I absolutely agree that only a foolish nation would trust US policy at this point. How can we possibly be trusted by another nation? Ask Muammar Gadaffi. W. kept his deal, but then he was smashed by the wrecking ball that was HRC’s State Department. The trumpists may try to pursue a rational foreign policy (such as bringing about the Abraham Accords), but it will be immediately undone by the next administration.
We are still the giant on the world stage, but at this point any sane country would consider us a dangerous giant, given to bouts of insanity and capable of raining ruin on the rest of the world. The best course is probably not to be noticed if you can get away with it. If I were another country, I would be likely to use the eat-him-first strategy.
1) “…one of the effects of the progression of US administrations of the 21st Century … has been enormous reversals in a US foreign policy …”
• 100% agree.
• Yet, from my perspective *, for most of the world the narrative about / support for a policy was still very much contingent on which USA party was in power.
* = have been fortunate enough to backpack & travel on six continents – bush & city – in 4–5-month increments.
2) “…the world is realizing that the US is both weak and careening between two alternating points of view.”
• 100% agree
• Also, the world is realizing that the policy choices they have made cannot hold up to the fascist threat that is now coming to fruition.
• And most western countries have reached the point that the adults in-the-room do not far exceed the unserious/ woke.
***
I am old enough to remember when:
a) The adults in-the-room far exceeded the unserious/ woke.
b) It was one thing to spout nonsense when you were literally ‘young & stupid’, and an entirely different thing when you were old enough to know better.
c) In the first scenario you were usually just laughed out of the room – and learned your lesson, and in the second scenario the consequences were usually more severe (e.g., loss of credibility/ standing).
Unfortunately, our parents have died and many of the new adults-in-the- room – baby boomers, gen X – never grew up or/ and are seeking their children’s approval (i.e., the ‘young & stupid’).
The earlier adults-in-the-room had a foundation – responsibility, sacrifice, fair play, honor, right & wrong – that they used to provide stability & leadership.
We now know that many of the new adults-in-the-room cannot provide stability & leadership because they have no foundation and/ or are seeking their children’ approval.
One thing has been consistent: irresponsible fiscal policy. And it seems to get worse every year. Jerome Powell and his collaborators at the Fed have now added irresponsible monetary policy.
Ask Muammar Gadaffi. W. kept his deal, but then he was smashed by the wrecking ball that was HRC’s State Department.
His government was falling apart already.
“You can run, but you can’t hide.”
True, very true!
Twice during the 20th Century the US tried to remain out of world affairs; and twice we ended up paying a far higher price than if we had been involved from the get-go.
It may be a simplistic viewpoint I have; but, I see two choices. We can involve ourselves in the world or not. The “not” doesn’t work as both world wars and 9-11 demonstrated; so we must be involved in the world.
Then we also have two choices; be involved in the world on others’ terms (e.g., be reactionary) or set those terms as best we can (e.g., be proactive). I’d prefer to set the terms ourselves.
And yes, part of me too wishes that we could withdraw from the world; but, it just isn’t possible nor safe to not be involved in the world.
That is what I don’t like about Tucker. He is an Isolationist and we cannot afford to be in this modern world. And yes, we flip flop depending on the admin we have, more so than use to be. But other countries seem to be doing the same thing. The World stage is influx, it is going to be awhile until everything is settled. In the mean time The Four Horsemen, plus the Fifth are here. (the Fifth I just saw is Misinformation)
“Elections have consequences.
Stolen elections have catastrophic consequences.”
– Steve Bannon
Whiplash might be the least of it this time.
And whose fault is it? From my view the GOP is not much different from 30-40 years ago: slightly right of center and stupid. Seems to me it’s the Dems who have tumbled off the left cliff and are not even sane anymore. And they’ve seem to have taken about 40% of the population with them.
charles:
I agree.
Tucker may long for the 1930’s and early 1940’s when the US Army Air Force and it’s fleet of powerful and accurate bombers would keep navies of our enemies safely away from our shores and islands. That proved to be wishful thinking at best.
But maybe Tucker is more astute and sophisticated that my feeble brain can comprehend.
Are there no adults in the Oval Office? Jill, take Brandon to Delaware until December 2022, and enforce the Brandon Lid. He is not helping anyone:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/03/world-war-iii.php
Long ago, demokrats and republicans both believed in the overall “goodness” of the USA.
That went out the window with the Vietnam war.
Today, the demokrats hate and despise everything about the USA and republicans, in their timidity and stupidity, allow the demokrats to set the agenda.
Any nation on earth would be incredibly foolish to believe the USA will be a reliable partner. Look at Obama’s and Biden’s policies towards Poland and Ukraine.
If Israel is smart, they will begin seeking partners they can rely on, because folks like Bidet – and really any demonkrat – would welcome the total destruction of Israel.
As far as the USA becoming isolationist, just look at S.America and Central America; the nations there, for the most part, are in fact isolationist. They have avoided both World Wars – practically speaking – and generally mind their own business.
The tough part of being isolationist is watching events we see in Ukraine and feel that the USA should do something, because the capability to assist in a real and powerful way, exists.
As an aside, Bidet and his commie handlers are all for allowing into the USA illegal aliens from who knows where, but I have yet to hear Bidet enact some sort of policy to allow into the USA Ukrainian refugees.
I will surmise it’s because they would vote republican.
Given the factors Neo cites, part of me tends to believe that both the World and the U.S. would be better served if we took a bow, no encore called for, and exited the world stage. Then the reality sets in. Where would we get our oil? Where would we get our electronics, pharmaceuticals, and virtually everything else that is manufactured?
No, we cannot possibly isolate commercially, because we have entanglements with China for nearly everything; a multitude of sketchy countries for other commodities; and potentially with Russia, Iran and Venezuela for oil and gas. If we are commercially committed to international entanglements, we must be diplomatically involved. But, since we will soon be a second rate military power, although fully vested in social justice and diversity, perhaps we can simply blend with the crowd. Or we would like to believe. I suspect that there are a multitude of “long knives”, wielded by people with long memories who would probe our weakness.
I remember from my college days that Aristotle said democracies make bad allies.
“. . . maybe distrust of the US will lead to a sort of enforced American isolation on the world stage.”
Just as likely it will lead to an enforced American immolation on the world stage.
That is what I don’t like about Tucker. He is an Isolationist and we cannot afford to be in this modern world.
I disagree. The only TV I watch is Tucker. He has a bullshit detector par none. He believes that 85% of the DC politicians are crooks. I agree. Something can be said for it if, as FDR once said, “It’s OK if he is our son of a bitch.”
I am old and have watched a long time what is going on. My first vote was for Nixon in 1960. That was an example of “Our son of a bitch,” but he could never be forgiven by the left for Alger Hiss.
Now, we have an entire miseducated ruling class that believe in fairies. Stopping oil and gas when there is no feasible alternative for decades is lunacy.
Climate Change resembles the Tulip Mania of the 17th century. We get this when almost all research funding in science is government controlled. Politicians are very poor at setting realistic goals. Pharmaceutical research, of course, is funded by Big Pharma and a few megalomaniacs like Bill Gates.
For example.
In this century, strategic power is increasingly measured and exercised by economic strength, by technological sophistication and your story – who you are, what your values are; can you attract ideas and talent and goodwill? And on each of those measures, this will be a failure for Russia.”
Belief in fairies.
If Israel is smart, they will begin seeking partners they can rely on, because folks like Bidet – and really any demonkrat – would welcome the total destruction of Israel.
This was/is the Abraham Accords.
Federal Government international policy IS consistent… for 4-8 years. It then reverses.
that guy,
I’m a bit doubtful that the majority of the world “is realizing that the policy choices they have made cannot hold up to the fascist threat that is now coming to fruition.”
But I certainly hope that is the case.
“many of the new adults-in-the- room – baby boomers, gen X – never grew up or/ and are seeking their children’s approval (i.e., the ‘young & stupid’).”
Bingo.
“The earlier adults-in-the-room had a foundation – responsibility, sacrifice, fair play, honor, right & wrong – that they used to provide stability & leadership.”
At base those rest upon Judeo/Christian values/virtues. In abandoning and/or rejecting those ‘obsolete’ virtues, they have nothing of substance left to stand upon.
Should be Open Thread, but Ukraine war analysis so off topic: Bill Roggio and cdr-salamander, FDD is Foundation Defending Democracy
from https://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/
Here is the link to the podcast:
https://soundcloud.com/defenddemocracy/episode-65-cdr-salamander-ukraine-war?utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing
“Thursday, March 10, 2022
A Full Hour on the War in Ukraine with FDD’s Bill Roggio
Earlier this week I had the pleasure of sitting down with Bill Roggio as a guest on his podcast over at FDD, “Generation Jihad.”
Listeners to Midrats will recognize Bill as a regular guest there over the years, usually on the topics of international terrorism and Afghanistan, but we’ve turned the table around this time not only as host/guest, but topic.
Bill and I spent the hour discussing the war in Ukraine in a very broad manner. Give it a listen.
I hope you enjoy the podcast as much as I did being Bill’s guest.”
What’s “isolation”? As far as I can tell it’s a smear. (Well, the Tailgunner Troll brigade will smear me regardless.)
Is there no middle ground between “station troops all over the world and invade countries all the time” and “isolation” that we could try to explore?
Trade is largely good. Sure, buying all your natural gas from a revanchist nuclear-armed tyrant who can reach you by land is maybe not the smartest trade, but you can have trade without it being a suicide pact. There’s a middle ground between stupid suicidal trade and no trade at all we could explore, surely?
Keeping the sea lanes open is good. It’s expensive but we benefit more, I think. Maybe we can prioritize closer to home but it’s not a choice between having no Navy at all and having a huge Navy that’s everywhere, there is a middle ground we could explore surely?
And while having an army makes sense, is it really necessary to continue to occupy Germany, Japan, and Korea? Surely there’s a middle ground between fighting wars as we have the last 50 years, and never fighting any wars at all that we could explore, surely?
And so it’s not really a choice between status quo and “isolation”, then, is it? And we don’t know that the status quo represents maximum security or maximum benefit to our nation, do we?
No, I’m afraid “isolation” talk is a rhetorical tactic. Some of us think it makes sense to dial back a bit on the foreign commitments, some of us want to go up to 11 on them, and there are positions at all points on the spectrum from up-to-11 “invade the world/invite the world/make everything everywhere but here” and “isolation” as caricatured in the 1930s by people who were trying to get us into a European war.*
*The war found us, but it’s not as though we were following the rules on neutrality either, just sayin’. Let the Tailgunner Trolls make of it what they will.
Arguably, “irresponsible fiscal policy” began in 1913 with the implementaion of a fiat money system.
Charles,
I agree that isolationism doesn’t work. We’ve now learned that “nation building” doesn’t work well with cultures fundamentally antithetical to our own. Japan and South Korea share enough of our values that our assistance in rebuilding those nations worked.
SHIREHOME,
I don’t see Tucker as isolationist. I see him as an advocate of realpolitik.
Banned Lizard,
Bingo.
physicsguy,
I see the GOP as much different from 30 years ago. They are right of today’s center. I base that assessment upon both their actions and lack of action.
om,
I’m unaware of any evidence of adults in the Oval Office…
JohnTyler,
What capability does the U.S. possess to assist in the Ukraine in a real and powerful way?
Eeyore,
We once had a Republic with representatives grounded in Judeo/Christian values. That ensured a commonality… now ‘gone with the wind’.
Mike K,
“Belief in fairies” is a requisite for every collectivist ideology.
SHIREHOME,
My understanding is that Israel has not condemned Russia. I don’t think that means they approve, just that they currently stand alone and must play their cards close to their vest.
@Geoffrey BritainJapan and South Korea share enough of our values that our assistance in rebuilding those nations worked.
In Japan’s case I think that we reduced their nation to bone-flecked ash may have provided some encouragement in “sharing enough of our values”. In South Korea, they were just getting out from under hundreds of years of domination by China, Russia, and Japan–don’t forget that South Korea from 1953 to 1987 was ruled by autocrats so it’s not like the people of South Korea were consulted on whether they wanted to accept American assistance. (I know Koreans who were part of that struggle to become a democracy…)
We’re not as bad as most hegemons who set up client states but we shouldn’t pretend it didn’t happen.
Frederick,
I too favor a middle ground. Maintaining the word’s sea lanes requires strategically placed bases around the world. The world should be paying its fair share of the expenses.
I’m unaware of our occupying Japan. Our forces in South Korea are a tripwire. Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine makes it highly unlikely that we will pull out any more of our troops from Germany.
The Tailgunner Trolls, like monday morning quarterbacks and fair weather politicians… we shall always have with us. Hindsight is 20/20 and the human race produces a certain % of them in each generation.
Japan shares our traditional belief in the value of education, hard work, delayed gratification, parental responsibility and familial obligations. The basic values that ensure socioeconomic success. So too with S. Korea.
@Geoffrey:I’m unaware of our occupying Japan.
It’s easy to miss 50,000 soldiers.
As for the “tripwire” theory I have my doubts that it really would work that way. I understand the logic but I question whether that logic reflects reality. I am not convinced that the US or the world is safer by using Americans as “tripwires”.
I had indeed missed those 54,000 American military stationed in Japan. Somehow had the idea that our forces had pretty much left with MacArthur…
A tripwire is of course not meant to, in and of itself, stop an invasion. It’s a warning to a potential aggressor of the consequence they will bring upon themselves, if they trip that wire.
So too with Japan and China. If China were to act upon its hate for Japan and invade or nuke Japan, they’d bring themselves into direct conflict with the US. Well that was true under Trump, under Biden… not f’n likely. Which is why there are reports of factions in Japan pushing for its remilitarization.
“That is what I don’t like about Tucker. He is an Isolationist and we cannot afford to be in this modern world.”
Says who? We’ve got enough nukes to destroy the planet, the most dynamic and innovative population in the world, and over half a billion natural consumers in our own hemisphere.
An America that turned inward would certainly become a different society and it would lead the rest of the world to change as much or more. One can certainly argue what those changes might be and whether they’d be for better or worse but I’m getting really tired of this blinkered, deterministic, infantilizing view that the way things are is the only way they can be.
For pete’s sake, look how radically things have changed in America in less than 18 months based on one election.
Mike
We’ve got enough nukes to destroy the planet and won’t control our southern border. We have politicians who talk about nukes being used on American citizens when the issue of the second amendment is raised. We have other politicians who blame who 87% of the population for the sins attributed to systemic melaninism. Nope, nothing of concern inside the county. Au contraire, Tucker is a good voice on those issues.
But to contend that the world will let America sort out those problems correctly and not take advantage or leverage internal strife to weaken the country is foolish, something piled higher and deeper. To cling to isolationism is, problematic.
As to Tailgunner Joe, McCarthy was right about Communist infiltration into the State Department. How many were there? Not my pet project. But does the name Alger Hiss, strike a cord, Frederick? Now to be an avowed Communist in many aspects of society is no longer a stigmata.
Commander Salamander* and his interviewer’s biases are evident and apparently prevent them from grasping Putin’s primary motivation in his invasion of the Ukraine.
* almost certainly borrowed from author David Weber’s fictional character Honor Harrington.
So we get involved before things go wrong.
In 1936, had a single French battalion–some say a platoon–resisted the German remilitarization of the Rhineland, the Wehrmacht would have returned to Berlin and canned Hitler. Bingo. No WW II.
What, today, would the historians be calling this? Sordid victors’ vengeance? Struggle for markets? Ethno-national rivalry.
Point is, to make a difference early on, you have to do things which don’t look urgent or reasonable. And you overturn that which is, or can be made to look as if, the people’s will is our enemy.
And people get killed for….nothing, since we have no idea that what we prevented was Something. May not have been.
How much of this would the US left stand for? They don’t even like straight-up self defense. Imagine regime change in the MENA because….China is behind the current crop.
Politically, I suspect, what would be acceptable is to be prepared to let things go at least part way, and obviously, to Hell and then respond vigorously. That would have a higher cost, but trying to sell enforcing the predictions of our foreign policy establishment before anything is obvious would be difficult.
In other words, we don’t put a cruise missile up Kim’s butt. Totally unacceptable. Instead, we have substantial forces in Korea and await some clown in Pyongyang to get a hot idea about how to take Seoul in three days. See the Korean War.
It’s been seventy years, near enough, since the fighting stopped, but serving on the Z with the Second ID can get you killed even today.
“intervention” is the best way to do things if we could get away with it, internally and politically. But we can’t. We have to wait for the pot to boil.
Geoffrey appears to have missed CDR-Salamander’s (Sal) warning that he does not claim to understand Vlad’s mind, motivations, and said that those in the west who claim to have that knowledge are full of it. Sal was more measured and diplomatic than I. He focuses on Vlad’s/Russia’s military capabilities and their actions.
No mention of the “threat” posed by NATO to Vlad was made by Sal or Bill. That may be why Geoffrey disparages Sal and Bill Roggio, But you see Sal actually knows something about NATO, Eastern Europe, the Baltics and Afghanistan, Not an armchair analyst.
They talked almost entirely about actions. What has been done. They also opined about the lunacy of imposing a No Fly Zone. Neither thought it was a good idea, would be viewed as a declaration of war by the US and NATO against Russia. NATO would have to attack air defense assets on Russian soil that cover Ukrainian airspace.
So if you are fixated on NATO or think you can understand the deep or subtle motivations of Vlad you would be disappointed in the podcast.
BTW it wasn’t “Rah, rah, rah, an hour of Ukraine hopium.” It is a grim situation for Ukraine. The map (gains made by Russia) doesn’t lie. If it turns into a Ukranian resistance movement against the Russians it may become very very bloody. Vlad will do whatever it takes (IMO).
@Richard Aubrey:In 1936, had a single French battalion–some say a platoon–resisted the German remilitarization of the Rhineland, the Wehrmacht would have returned to Berlin and canned Hitler. Bingo. No WW II…
“intervention” is the best way to do things if we could get away with it, internally and politically. But we can’t. We have to wait for the pot to boil.
I think you and I are on the same page but I’d be a little stronger about it. Most “pots” don’t boil over if left to themselves and meddling is often a way of setting other pots aboiling.
Supposing we knew your Rhineland counterfactual to be true, of course we only know it in hindsight.
If the first cop to pull over Ted Bundy for speeding had shot him in the face on the spot innocent lives would definitely have been saved. Should we therefore let cops shoot people in the face when they pull people over for speeding? I think we’d find that a lot more innocent people die than the Ted Bundys of the world would have accounted for. Ted Bundys would have to be a lot more common for this policy to make any sense.
Not every despot is a potential Hitler. In the 20th century we all knew that the US was supporting some despots because we believed Communist despots to be worse than our sort. It was even usually true.
Maybe it’s better to let people’s neighbors handle it, the way they did Idi Amin Dada. The people who got rid of him weren’t exactly angels either, point is they were able to take care of it.
What we’ve been doing the last 70 years has fostered both dependence and resentment as well as getting people killed. I’d like us try other things for a while. Maybe they won’t be much better, but it’s not like we know that we’re doing the best possible.
Who to believe?
Now will it be that Vlad had to invade Ukraine to stop Fauchi?
https://redstate.com/streiff/2022/03/11/russia-convenes-special-un-security-council-meeting-to-investigate-us-support-of-bio-weapons-research-in-ukraine-n534943
Because the WuFlu didn’t come from the Wuhan Institute of virology according to Xi and Fauchi. Nor did Syrians supported by Vlad use chemical warfare against Assad’s foes. Who do you choose to believe becomes difficult.
Not every Pol Pot is a, who was that dude in Rwanda? Oh well, pots will be pots.
om,
Once confirmed, I have no argument with you or cdr.salamander on what has actually occurred. Never have disputed that Putin is using armed force invading the Ukraine.
IMO, Putin’s rationale in bringing up the US funded bio ‘research’ labs is not likely to be used as a causus belli for the invasion of the Ukraine. As it would have been much more effective as a rationale for invasion had it been used before invading.
Rather I think Putin’s purpose is to discredit the US while also giving a stronger rationale to China for its refusal to support the sanctions against Russia.
I won’t argue with you anymore. Made my point and I will move on. Let others take it as they will.
For what it’s worth:
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsf/articles/20220310.aspx
“Special Operations: Tragicomedy Of Errors
” …….. Before 2014 Ukrainians did not see a need for local defense units or a large military to defend against a Russian attack. After all, the Russians had signed an agreement in 1994 in which Russia promised to never attack Ukraine. In return, Ukraine got rid of the nuclear weapons it had inherited when the Soviet Union dissolved. The United States and Britain were also parties to that agreement, mainly to pay for disposing of the nukes and as well as aiding Ukraine if Russia broke the agreement. …..”
Issues, causes, pretexts. Things that actually happened, outside someone’s mind.
Richard,
Yes, on a case by case basis, while always considering that getting involved may make things even worse than they would have otherwise been. This is why there is no substitute for wise statesmanship. Even then, a surgical intervention is a tricky proposition. There’s wisdom in insisting that a practical exit plan be part of any intervention being contemplated. Starting with Vietnam, lots of short term thinking, little thought given to potential long term consequences.
Explanations are lessened, even misleading, when incomplete.
In other VERY important news…
“Jordan Peterson – Warning: Bill 67”
https://youtu.be/iwQy-MVP4u0
Speculation versus knowledge and experience, choose wisely.
@ om > Strategy Page is always worth a read.
That post includes a summary of the background of tripwires and motivations, as you noted, but mostly concentrates on a single question: why Russia wasn’t able to roll over the Ukrainians and take Kyiv immediately, as Putin clearly expected.
The first element, the “internal defense units,” sound like what we have enshrined in the Second Amendment, as the “well regulated militia” that ought to be kept organized and trained in every state and ideally every county. Because the USA hasn’t been a target of an explicit foreign military invasion (and you all know why I highlighted those particular adjectives) since frontier days (I have just finished reading about some of the cross-border antics of Canada & the Hudson Bay Company in the NW fur trade controversies), those militia organizations have lapsed and been absorbed into the state National Guard system.
However, IMO Ukraine in the current instance is certainly modeling what the Militia should be capable of if needed.
And also demonstrates why the enemies of America are so intent on subverting the 2A.
Has anyone ever considered a situation that biden would just surrender if putin uses nukes on america first and the defense system fails and two nukes have landed? People assume putin wouldn’t dare to use nukes because of mutual assured destruction but what if putin see through that and uses nuclear weapons on America first betting on biden surrendering because any retaliation would lead to an all out nuclear warfare that will destroy earth for sure? Biden despites all his tough talk will surrender because he has too much to lose, so are people like romney and pelosi who have tens of grandchildren if surrendering to russia means their grandchildren will be safe, they will do it. In a game of chicken the man with the most insanity and least to lose win.
Companion post by Austin Bay:
https://www.strategypage.com/on_point/202203109124.aspx
[NOTE: see Richard Aubrey’s “boiling pots” comment.]
He notes another example of an entrepreneur’s prototype aircraft and fast attack warships, which actually would require government contracts to produce, and concludes:
Having introduced the topic of entrepreneurial activity and citizen impact, I thought you all might like a “feel good” story or two from the grassroots.
Personal note: a friend of mine in our ward sent me the first link. She has a relative (not a Ukrainian citizen) serving on the staff at the Ukraine Temple. His family has been evacuated, but he returned to Kyiv to provide what security he could for the building.
The first post includes a video of a BYU choir singing “Come Thou Fount” in Ukrainian.
The second post I linked (in the following comment) included the information that there is a very active organization in Utah facilitating the efforts of Ukrainian students wishing to attend college in the US, particularly, but not exclusively, at BYU campuses in Provo and Idaho.
I suspect the ad-hoc choir is composed mostly of Ukrainian natives and returned missionaries who served in that country, with additions from the “official” choirs singing phonetically.
https://latterdaysaintmag.com/video-a-moving-cry-from-ukrainian-latter-day-saints/
NOTE TO NEO: A couple of days ago, the system ate one of my comments, which you rescued; Cicero and huxley also noted they had lost one of theirs.
That has happened to me again.
I have no idea what the Hall Monitor objected to this time, as it was just a human interest story about an organization in Utah gathering relief aid for Ukraine.
I won’t try to repost it tonight, in case you can rescue it when you have time to look.
I may be breaking some unknown length restriction, as I hate to cut things out of my quoted excerpts.
@Geoffrey > “I’m unaware of our occupying Japan.”
I didn’t know we still had 54,000 troops there, but AesopSpouse’s dad was stationed in Japan in the 1950s, after his stint in the Korean War.
AS was in grade school at the time, and his younger brother was born there.
My view is Leftists in my lifetime have wanted the US to be not worthy of a friendship to be not counted on.
Yet without a world policeman standing on the corner you get unlawful invasions, I think Trump in office Ukraine wouldn’t have happened, and Taiwan wouldn’t be threatened. The world policeman doesn’t have to break bones, just powerful enough to do it.
ArsopFan:
IIRC the regime in North Korea is one reason the USA has forces stationed in Japan, a question you did not ask, and I note you did not use occupy, as in an “army of occupation.”
Isolationists like the “army of occupation” theme it seems.
Frederick, G.B
I was not making recommendations, but laying out the options.
Wait for the Big Thing with hideous cost, meantime being relatively inactive. Or impose many Small Things with the presumption a Big Thing will be prevented, but which one…?
Kind of one takeaway from Fehrenbach’ s This Kind of War.
We can get America to unite for The Big Thing. But for the minor, preventive actions with no obvious payoff, we need Legions, iron- hard, willing to follow their banners and die in the mud. Interesting concept. The French did it with their Foreign Legion, whose casualties did not bother the French family.
Not sure that will happen. Not my idea but it seems inescapable.
Is there no middle ground between “station troops all over the world and invade countries all the time” and “isolation” that we could try to explore?
We’ve been occupying the middle ground since 1945. “Station troops all over the world and invade countries all the time” is a situation that never existed outside the paulbot imagination.
Again, the places we’ve had ground troops in combat for a period of time longer than six weeks have been Korea, VietNam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The short term operations were all in the Caribbean basin. We also had (with Italy and France) a force on police duty in Beirut in 1982-84. That turned into combat when they were attacked by Hezbollah.
As for our troops stationed abroad, the share of American troops posted abroad has since 1946 varied between 13% and 30% of the total. Apart from shooting wars, the vast bulk have been in Europe or in Japan. The manpower devoted to overseas deployments has been cut by 75% since 1963, and is now down to about 200,000 men. The share of gross domestic product devoted to military uses is currently about 3.7% of the total, as low as it has been at any time since 1940.
Isolationism as an effective doctrine died in August 1957 when the Soviet Union successfully flew an R-7 ballistic missile. That technology has only improved in accuracy. We need someone with a foreign policy vision of Cardinal Richelieu, but what we keep getting is Napeleon III.
And that’s probably insulting to Nap III.
I think US isolationism died with Thomas Jefferson’s presidency.
Some long time ago I had read the Jefferson created the US Navy. Then I had read that he was an isolationist. Which is it?
Well, … Pres. Adams was the one who was strongly in favor of a Navy when Jefferson was against it. Adams and congress funded the creation of a Navy but progress was slow. So the actual building of it happened under Jefferson’s watch. By the time that was taking place, Jefferson decided that the havoc that the Barbary coast pirates were wreaking on our merchant vessels was unacceptable. Isolationism is nice theory, until reality sets in.
@Geoffrey:I’m unaware of our occupying Japan.
It’s easy to miss 50,000 soldiers.
That might suffice to occupy Kyushu if they were arrayed as an occupying force, which they’re not. About 1/2 of our manpower in Japan is located on Okinawa, where resides 1.1% of Japan’s population.
TommyJay:
I suppose it depends how you define “isolationism.” Isolationism is not the same as pacifism (and even pacifists don’t agree with each other on everything). Having a navy certainly doesn’t preclude being an isolationist under the usual definitions I’ve heard, nor does using if defensively against a direct threat to the US.
One talks about “isolationism” WRT to ramping down the policy of caring about the wider world, of being the “World’s Policeman”.
But wouldn’t it be nice if the current administration might decide to care about the USA?
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/more-140-earmarks-linked-senate-majority-leader-schumer-15t-spending-bill-braun
https://nypost.com/2022/03/11/high-prices-and-suffering-americans-are-not-a-bug-but-a-feature-for-the-establishment/
Richard Aubrey…”In 1936, had a single French battalion–some say a platoon–resisted the German remilitarization of the Rhineland, the Wehrmacht would have returned to Berlin and canned Hitler. Bingo. No WW II.”
This history of this decision is interesting. According to Andre Beaufre (then a young captain on the French general staff, after the war a general), the political leaders were surprised to be told that the *only* mobilization plan that existed was a *total* plan, involving the requisitioning of vehicles, calling up of millions of reservists, etc…and it was claimed that no more limited plan could be quickly requisitioned.
There was fear of disrupting the economic recovery then in progresss. It was also felt that ‘neutrals’, especially America, would view any military action as aggression on the part of France….this was certainly the case with some influential people in Britain.
A better political leadership would have told the generals: ‘Just do it. Scrounge up a force, include the Paris police if you have to. The Americans and the Brits will get over it.’
Beaufre, in his 1965 book The Fall of France: “The die was cast. We had let slip our last chance of stifling at birth the rise of Hitler’s Germany…Through idleness, stupidity, political blindness, or simply frivolity, general opinion lived through these grave events, the result of which was to be a great and catastrophic war, in a kind of sonambulism on which it is necessary to dwell at some length, because it shows how fate deals the cards of history and lulls to sleep its chosen victims.”
Started with the Democrats when they stabbed our allies in the back in Vietnam in 1975. Democrats have been screwing allies over ever since.
Remember that the Clintons giving the Chinese unlimited access to all our CIA files resulted in a number of sources being exposed and eliminated. Clinton got bags of cash from Chinese military spies (even entertained the top CCP military spy in the oval office) and gave up the CIA files. CIA gave Huang any file he asked for him. 57 times the CIA brought him files and briefed him for hours while he took notes. Then he went over to Worthen Bank and faxed his notes to his contacts in Asia.
Democrats get people killed. Corrupt, dishonest and unpatriotic. I’m amazed that anyone would trust us with his life. Iraq, Afghanistan just more reminders that Democrats feel no loyalty or responsibility for people who put their lives at risk for us.
I think Mbunge @ 9:05pm has the right of it.
Like “real communism” and “real socialism,” I don’t think “real independence” has ever been tried. I’m not sure it can be done, but I’d like to live in a country where I could find out.
Canada has a wealth of natural resources and is around the same size as the U.S. and they don’t involve themselves in 1/100th of the stuff the U.S. does. I know it’s not apples to apples, but Canada has had a much less interventionist history on the world stage and seems to have much less conflict at home and abroad.
Everything is so interconnected it’s hard to run a control experiment where things are disentangled, but I think Colin Powell’s “Pottery Barn” doctrine applies to a lot of the ills we suffer as a nation. Would the world be better or worse if we had not involved ourselves in Afghanistan two decades ago? Would Afghanistan be better or worse? Would the U.S.? What about Viet Nam? Libya? Ukraine?
I don’t mean this flippantly, but as far as I know Americans are free to travel to Ukraine of Afghanistan and engage in those areas in any way they wish to try. Comedian Brian Sack just left his home in New York to travel to Poland and work feeding Ukranian refugees at the border. I’m sure there are men in America who would volunteer to be mercenaries for the Ukranian forces. Maybe some would even be mercenaries for Russia?
Again, Switzerland is not apples to apples with the U.S., but it seems to get in a lot less conflict than its neighbors Italy, Germany, France… And I’m sure, over the years, some Swiss lads have joined the French Foreign Legion or found other ways to engage in war.
I read Osama bin Laden’s declaration of war against the U.S. I think he was sincere in what he wrote. He declared war against the U.S. because of our presence in the middle east, especially areas he believed were sacred to Islam. We were entangled in his homeland, so he attacked us in ours, so we attacked him and his accomplices (except Saudi Arabia)… Are there now more young men coming of age in Iraq and Afghanistan plotting revenge for perceived U.S. harm to their countries, families?
Because our government involves itself in many things we have a reflexive action to debate the level at which it should be involved. But what if involvement wasn’t the natural state of affairs?
Regarding my comment at 2:21pm,
I should stress that in my scenario I think it would be perfectly fine for U.S. citizens to involve themselves in anything they choose. It’s just that these things wouldn’t be done at a Federal level, on “behalf” of us all. For decades many Americans have gone to Israel for a year or more to work on kibbutzes, even serve in the IDF. Americans join the French Foreign Legion. Many Americans work for NGOs. Americans working independent of the U.S. government provide immense amounts of aid abroad (and at home).
I see ads on television now to donate to independent aid groups doing humanitarian work in Ukraine. Glenn Beck independently organized an incredible mission to get stranded Americans, Afghanis and others out of Afghanistan when our government abandoned the people there.
Time to get seriously, seriously worried:
“Biden…says there’ll be no WWIII”—
https://www.timesofisrael.com/biden-vows-severe-price-if-russia-uses-chemical-weapons-says-therell-be-no-wwiii/
I read Osama bin Laden’s declaration of war against the U.S. I think he was sincere in what he wrote. He declared war against the U.S. because of our presence in the middle east, especially areas he believed were sacred to Islam.
Our troop force in Saudi Arabia during the period running from 1990 to 2002 averaged 6,200 in number. They were not deployed near Mecca or Medina. They were there at the invitation of that country’s government. Note, in 1992, the population of expatriates living in Saudi Arabia was about 4.7 million. We had in 2001 two airbases in Turkey. They’d been there since 1951 / 52, before Osama bin Laden was born. That was ‘our presence in the middle east’.
Rufus T. Firefly:
Canada’s population in 2020 was 38 million, slightly smaller than that of California. That’s about 1/9th of the US population. Their land masses are about the same, but Canada’s uninhabited land mass is 80% to US’s 47%. The Canadian GDP is about 1.6 trillion to the US’s approximately 21 trillion.
In addition, Canada relies somewhat on the US for protection in the international sphere. Canada has also participated in some of the same wars as the US. It entered WWII earlier, and was part of the Gulf War and the war in Afghanistan.
Canada would have difficulty being a great power even if it wanted to.
Back to this threads thesis — foreign policy lurching is bad for allies and for the US.
Agreed. Can we keep watch on public voices declaring and deepening the same thesis?
Mike K at 6:37 states,
‘That is what I don’t like about Tucker. He is an Isolationist and we cannot afford to be in this modern world.’
“I disagree. The only TV I watch is Tucker. He has a bullshit detector par none.”
And then proceeds to give his sagacity claim some examples.
But none of these examples seem to address the claim about isolationism or contradict it.
It is good to be reluctant to resort to arms for a democracy, especially with troops. I recall reading a Rasmussen poll on that topic and Ukraine. People with lass than average incomes were most against sending US troops to Ukraine to fight Russia. By contrast, those most supporting this were the richest, making over 200K per year.
So, we’re still very much a split country, with those at the top most responsive to idiot propaganda.
The Middle Ground in using troops was mooted, above, as a great foreign policy problem. But I think the Obama years saw the GWOT find such a policy.
We don’t preposition troops in many conflict prone nations. Rather, we send advisors to oversee military effectiveness and help train them.
This local force develops intelligence is then combined with remotely piloted drones — pilots in Las Vegas or Florida, for instance. This combination has proved both cost effective and casualty effective in combating ISIS Islamist terrorists in sub-Saharan Africa, for example.
Unfortunately, the only example of waging a quite strike similarly in a war for territory seems to be Azerbaijan versus Armenia not many months ago.
In fact, early reports from Ukraine had these tactics and drones from Turkey and Israel, following on this very example in the field of battle.
How much or how little US military doctrine is set to incorporate this changing battle strategy in new conflicts, I do not knot know.
Biden’s quick fold and fumble of the exit in Afghanistan suggests that either the US is too weak to do it when called for, or else this high tech used locally might be completely vulnerable to higher level incompetence.
In either case, it was a disastrous charade. And suggests we let others better motivated to be competent set the new standards for today — not the US.
In short, there are answers to thread the binary choice of complete isolationism versus no full on military engagement. As usual, however, it comes down to Democrats’ hatred for the US, our actual interests, and deployment of military competence.
The primary need is for the US to define our interests and unify around this. And God Damn those who won’t! But that would take the leadership Rs don’t currently possess — much less, a party that would defend its own President.
Trump had to defend the US interests at the border against the Media, the Democrats, and the Ruling Class and half the “Republocrat” Party.
Trump’s single best Big Media voice is Tucker Carlson. Yet on the FP front, he is a mixed bag. The only saving grace he possesses is a knack for attacking the comfortable Ruling Class interests first.
Newt Gingrich is more likely to actually lead with common sense and defend our national FP interests. He’s been issuing a new book almost every year since Obama. Perhaps Trump will replace Giuliani with Newt for his leading spokesman?
David Foster: See Sowell, “Intellectuals And Society”, a series of essays, particularly the one on Intelllectuals And War. Goes into ’36 in detail. Considering the horrific casualties of the preceding war, and the numbers of mutilated in public being a fraction of those not in public, a certain reluctance is to be expected.
Hence the need for, as some suggested, a foreign legion of some sort.
Arguably, “irresponsible fiscal policy” began in 1913 with the implementaion of a fiat money system.
1. We did not institute a fiat currency in 1913. We did not institute one in 1933 or in 1944. It was only in 1971/73 that we did so. No, we do not need gold. We need satisfactory monetary policy.
2. We did not have irresponsible fiscal policy – in the sense of inadvisable public sector borrowing – until 1961. It was small scale at first.
An America that turned inward would certainly become a different society and it would lead the rest of the world to change as much or more.
We’ve been gradually turning inward for 50 years. We’re not a ‘different society’ for ‘a that. Social and cultural decay has it’s own dynamic (and one manifest in Canada and other countries with small military establishments and small ball foreign policies).
Neo,
I suspect by Jefferson’s own definition of isolationism, prior to his presidency, he felt that it meant that the fledgling USA didn’t have to waste precious resources on a Navy.
And of course, having built several war vessels it is not possible to “defensively” escort many hundreds of merchant vessels with them. The only meaningful option was to attack and bloody the troublemakers.
Half of the trouble then were the Barbary coast pirates, but the other half was the British Navy who routinely engaged in the theft of merchandise from our vessels, but more outrageously kidnaped our merchant seamen into servitude on British vessels. Officers like Stephen Decatur became famous because he offensively attacked a major British war ship and sunk it. This was such a blow to the British psyche that the kidnapping of our seamen pretty much ended.
You can call that a defensive action if you wish, but as those events take place, it certainly looks offensive.
_____
Can a nation have a Navy and be isolationist or only use it in a defensive posture? Sure. But if only your enemy is allowed to escalate a conflict, as our military does these days, then you’ve likely resigned yourself to a losing posture.
TommyJay:
As Jefferson described it, it certainly seems that HE thought it defensive:
The site where I found that quote goes on to describe it this way:
Which they authorized. But it was all in the service of defense against a force that had been aggressive for many years.
In going over the comments I find several with which I strongly agree:
neo on March 12, 2022 at 3:14 pm — in response to Rufus’s remarks on Canada.
TJ on March 12, 2022 at 4:58 pm — “The primary need is for the US to define our interests and unify around this. … But that would take the leadership Rs don’t currently possess — much less, a party that would defend its own President.
[… ] Perhaps Trump will replace Giuliani with Newt for his leading spokesman?”
That would be a major improvement if Trump would actually listen to Newt.
Art Deco on March 12, 2022 at 6:31 pm — “… we do not need gold. We need satisfactory monetary policy.”
Yes, Au, Ag, or other commodity moneys can all still be corrupted. Money is an “agreement”, nothing more, in reality. So the faith and trust in its management is what is important, regardless of the physical or digital form the money takes.
Interesting discussion around Jefferson and our early Navy. Back then we were the pipsqueak on the block. Now, as a “super power”, do we have to take a punch or two before we respond, so as not to be accused of bullying or “imperialism”?? And then respond mercilessly, … or with restricted ROE’s??
@ Rufus > “I see ads on television now to donate to independent aid groups doing humanitarian work in Ukraine.”
I tried to post something along those lines earlier in the thread and the Hall Monitor ate my comment. I’m going to try again now.
It’s a very interesting story in how things “coincidentally” lined up to get a lot of aid to Ukraine quickly in the early days of the (now-two-week) war.
Well it ate the first try, even radically shortened.
For practical ways to help, and an inspiring story, with information about a donation site in my follow-up comment.
March 8, 2022
I took this from another source, and the Hall Monitor would not allow that link.
To see the full East Idaho News article featuring the interview with Miller, see https://www.eastidahonews.com/2022/02/local-woman-desperate-to-help-family-in-ukraine-receives-outpouring-of-support-from-community/.
For some reason the HM did not like this source when included in the above comment:
https://latterdaysaintmag.com/three-latter-day-saint-couples-efforts-open-ways-for-you-to-directly-help-individual-families-in-ukraine-now/
Very odd that it’s okay as a stand-alone reference.
Note: Meridian Magazine aka latterdaysaintmag is the “premier” non-official media site for LDS Church members.
NEO there is something very very screwy going on with the commenting algorithm. I managed to post a comment with the original source link for the story, just standing by itself. Then tried to edit it and add some information about that site, and got the message “You can no longer edit this comment.”
Then I wrote a comment about that situation, and BOTH COMMENTS disappeared.
The only “trigger” in any of that was a reference to Latter-day Saints.
and latterdaysaintsmag
https://latterdaysaintmag.com/three-latter-day-saint-couples-efforts-open-ways-for-you-to-directly-help-individual-families-in-ukraine-now/
Well — I just isolated the offense as being in my attempted explanatory note – not sure what’s so offensive about it, so I’ll keep parsing it just for the exercise.
Note: (name of a magazine) aka latterdaysaintmag is the “premier” non-official media site for LDS Church members.
Well – that is curious.
No dice with the name spelled properly, so I will disguise it a bit.
The name of the magazine is M e r i d i a n.
This comment is absolutely giving me whiplash!
Will the HM object to something as innocuous as discussing the prime m_____n in Greenwich?
Why yes! Yes, it did.
It is ridiculous to choose to censor that word.
I’m leaving now.
Have a nice week-end.
AesopFan:
I have no idea what the spam folder’s objection was to that comment, but I took it out of spam and it’s posted now.
I have also donated through a church connection, not AesopFan’s, and there are numerous church organizations with feet on the ground in western Ukraine or in neighboring countries, helping with refugees. Shouldn’t be too difficult for believers to find a suitable group, and they are all doing needed refugee and medical work.
As to Tailgunner Joe, McCarthy was right about Communist infiltration into the State Department.
Various government security services as well as congressional committees were aware that the Soviets had agents in the federal government. McCarthy was a publicity-hound who added little or nothing to already existing knowledge.
ArtDeco:
Senator McCarthey’s unintended achievement was to give the Left tools to deflect and discredit attention to the pervasive actions of the Soviet tools embedded in government and society. But you know that.
Trying again. McCarthy may have had the objective of raising some public outrage and causing pushback. If the various alphabets and other government entities were half as mellow with the arrangements vs. the Sovs as they are today wrt the CCP, some public knowledge would not have gone far wrong.
Unfortunately, the libs managed to make it a Bad Word, since being anti-communist is, for them, a Bad Thing.
@ Kate > “I have also donated through a church connection, not AesopFan’s, and there are numerous church organizations with feet on the ground in western Ukraine or in neighboring countries, helping with refugees. Shouldn’t be too difficult for believers to find a suitable group, and they are all doing needed refugee and medical work.”
I never actually got the donation site posted.
https://www.toukrainewithlove.org/
Here’s another one, for the displaced orphans.
https://www.tikvaodessa.org/news-events/post/2022-emergency-relief-campaign/
And a story about another US group, not too far from me.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/project-cure-nonprofit-medical-supplies-ukraine-logistics-russia-war