Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Yamato

Challenging U.S. Foreign Policy

515 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Yamato

Let this be a place for discussion about foreign policy in general, but I do want to provide a reference for discussion as well.

The video below is important for Americans because we're being lied to by our corporate media and government, and Russia is just the beginning for the scope of this discussion, but it's a good beginning.

JOHN SIMPSON, BBC: "Western countries almost universally now believe that there’s a new Cold War and that you, frankly, have decided to create that. We see, almost daily, Russian aircraft taking sometimes quite dangerous manoeuvres towards western airspace. That must be done on your orders; you’re the Commander-in-Chief. It must have been your orders that sent Russian troops into the territory of a sovereign country – Crimea first, and then whatever it is that’s going on in Eastern Ukraine. Now you’ve got a big problem with the currency of Russia, and you’re going to need help and support and understanding from outside countries, particularly from the West. So can I say to you, can I ask you now, would you care to take this opportunity to say to people from the West that you have no desire to carry on with the new Cold War, and that you will do whatever you can to sort out the problems in Ukraine? Thank you!"

Vladimir Putin:

I'd like to listen to Putin and have some dialogue with him. I think we can tread lightly and carry a big stick while we still have one. Isolationism and economic warfare aren't free market capitalism, yet both conservatives and liberals support economic warfare. Liberals do and blame capitalism too, which makes Obama's policies even crazier. It was over a year ago that Obama already bombed twice as many countries as Bush. It's just been reported that Obama is sending a planned 300 ground troops to Cameroon.

I know talking about US foreign policy is like a Freeze Ray to most Republicans, even Commander Obama's. But maybe they will thaw out and engage this time. Putin is a Communist after all, which is their 2nd Worst Thing Ever.

For the record, John Simpson is British, not American.

Thoughts?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

Sounds like he is just wanting to copy US foreign policy himself, just to a smaller degree. The reactions of the west are because we are not liking what we see in the mirror. The world will become a much more interesting place, once China starts playing the same game.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormalcy

I watched this the other day and I was impressed with Putin's dialogue, at least, if not his authenticity. From his pretty well objectively verified views on DOMESTIC social policies, I'm very much against him - he's got a pretty oppressive agenda that doesn't think much about self expression or civil liberties for "deviants", etc.

On the foreign policy stuff though, I actually am largely at least sympathetic to the gist of his statements, if not in agreement. The only real problem is that he seems to be a hypocrite, basically talking about US nation building and such, but he invades Ukraine, etc. But I also admit I'm not up on foreign policy or the full situation in all this.

I think like any politician, he's obviously not fully honest in any of his statements, but that's just how things are with leaders, so I am not sure how much of his apparent dishonesty is bias against HIM, due to being "suspicious" of him because of his general social oppression, and how much is natural world leader deception and playing things close to the vest. In a way, I support the STATED goals of Russia in Syria and think he probably can at least defeat ISIS in that region for now, though I fear a lot of innocents are going to die, even moreso than when the US hits clearly civilian hospitals. He also sent troops into Khazikstan, I read, probably to keep ISIS from getting a nearby foothold to come into Russia. That and having the byproduct, or perhaps main goal, of helping Assad, are all things that certainly stack up as questionable.

But I think, at least from the captions, that he made a lot of sense or at least spoke very well in this conference.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

I watched this the other day and I was impressed with Putin's dialogue, at least, if not his authenticity. From his pretty well objectively verified views on DOMESTIC social policies, I'm very much against him - he's got a pretty oppressive agenda that doesn't think much about self expression or civil liberties for "deviants", etc.

On the foreign policy stuff though, I actually am largely at least sympathetic to the gist of his statements, if not in agreement. The only real problem is that he seems to be a hypocrite, basically talking about US nation building and such, but he invades Ukraine, etc. But I also admit I'm not up on foreign policy or the full situation in all this.

I think like any politician, he's obviously not fully honest in any of his statements, but that's just how things are with leaders, so I am not sure how much of his apparent dishonesty is bias against HIM, due to being "suspicious" of him because of his general social oppression, and how much is natural world leader deception and playing things close to the vest. In a way, I support the STATED goals of Russia in Syria and think he probably can at least defeat ISIS in that region for now, though I fear a lot of innocents are going to die, even moreso than when the US hits clearly civilian hospitals. He also sent troops into Khazikstan, I read, probably to keep ISIS from getting a nearby foothold to come into Russia. That and having the byproduct, or perhaps main goal, of helping Assad, are all things that certainly stack up as questionable.

But I think, at least from the captions, that he made a lot of sense or at least spoke very well in this conference.

Well, he plans no nation building there, he just wants to plainly annex it so formally he is right.

Whatever your opinion on the whole US foreign politics you surely cannot suppose that Putin is a bit better than any of our neocons and nation builder, he has the same goal as they do and uses different means thus being able to distance himself from others who claim that they are expanding their power for the benefit of others.

Edited by questionmark
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

America has a foreign policy ?

I thought it just responded to corporate requirements ?

Hey... somebody tell me.. what IS America's foreign policy ? :P

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

what IS America's foreign policy ? :P

A worthy question. It'd be nice to have the answers.

In Syria, our policy is regime change. If it's Iraq or Afghanistan, Israel or Saudi Arabia, it's propping truly horrifying regimes up.

Even if it's as bad as Gromdor says, and Russia is doing the same stuff but in smaller degree, then who in the world are we to judge? Shouldn't someone who's not doing the same wrong thing be the source of the opposition?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robinrenee

Let this be a place for discussion about foreign policy in general, but I do want to provide a reference for discussion as well.

The video below is important for Americans because we're being lied to by our corporate media and government, and Russia is just the beginning for the scope of this discussion, but it's a good beginning.

JOHN SIMPSON, BBC: "Western countries almost universally now believe that there’s a new Cold War and that you, frankly, have decided to create that. We see, almost daily, Russian aircraft taking sometimes quite dangerous manoeuvres towards western airspace. That must be done on your orders; you’re the Commander-in-Chief. It must have been your orders that sent Russian troops into the territory of a sovereign country – Crimea first, and then whatever it is that’s going on in Eastern Ukraine. Now you’ve got a big problem with the currency of Russia, and you’re going to need help and support and understanding from outside countries, particularly from the West. So can I say to you, can I ask you now, would you care to take this opportunity to say to people from the West that you have no desire to carry on with the new Cold War, and that you will do whatever you can to sort out the problems in Ukraine? Thank you!"

Vladimir Putin:

I'd like to listen to Putin and have some dialogue with him. I think we can tread lightly and carry a big stick while we still have one. Isolationism and economic warfare aren't free market capitalism, yet both conservatives and liberals support economic warfare. Liberals do and blame capitalism too, which makes Obama's policies even crazier. It was over a year ago that Obama already bombed twice as many countries as Bush. It's just been reported that Obama is sending a planned 300 ground troops to Cameroon.

I know talking about US foreign policy is like a Freeze Ray to most Republicans, even Commander Obama's. But maybe they will thaw out and engage this time. Putin is a Communist after all, which is their 2nd Worst Thing Ever.

For the record, John Simpson is British, not American.

Thoughts?

I actually think Putin is trying to prevent World War III. (Not that he's such a good guy. He's a ruthless dictator.)

He knows that the Anglo-American empire (and the other NATO nations) need a BIG banker's war.

Putin waited until Syria was getting very unstable... close to falling... and he stepped in and shoo'ed the US and Israeli "cartel" out of the fight.

Putin knows that Syria is the only thing standing between Israel and Iran. So Putin intervened.

The US is just stewing in their frustration.... like wtf we gonna do now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

We're exporting money and weapons, but Democracy? Wilsonianism was quite rich in a time when we couldn't even stomach females voting in our own country! We're still cleaning our own society up, slowly through time, the SCOTUS decision on gay marriage as a recent example. Some people would much rather have the right to marry their same sex lover than vote in another meaningless election. That number of people would be quite large when looking at all marriage, but I'm not going to propose starting another war in the Middle East so we can export marriage. The problems with forcing regime change on others through the barrel of a gun for democracy are failed states like Afghanistan and Iraq. If however the policy is to make make a lot of money for the military industry, it was a

borat-quote-great-success.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I actually think Putin is trying to prevent World War III. (Not that he's such a good guy. He's a ruthless dictator.)

He knows that the Anglo-American empire (and the other NATO nations) need a BIG banker's war.

Putin waited until Syria was getting very unstable... close to falling... and he stepped in and shoo'ed the US and Israeli "cartel" out of the fight.

Putin knows that Syria is the only thing standing between Israel and Iran. So Putin intervened.

The US is just stewing in their frustration.... like wtf we gonna do now?

Agreed, I think it was becoming clear that Assad's grip on power was deteriorating and not going to survive this war of attrition against ISIS & Friends forever or much longer. Russia's now on it, and Assad's not going anywhere. We're not going to take Putin to court over this little spat over Syria, he'll take us and probably bake us.

One thing we did was impose a buffer zone between our aircraft and Russia's. That's the real no-fly zone. Hillary Clinton is talking about something completely different. I guess Hillary Clinton is going to tell Russia what airbases they can fly their Su-24s from so not to be confused with the Syrian Su-24s taking off from the same base and crossing into her No-fly zone. Is Putin even going to answer the phone when she calls?

Republicans are continuing the chorus line of "strong" "weak" leadership, implying that Obama should have invaded Syria in 2013 when that scum-for-intelligence about the chemicals wasn't disproven (sp) yet. Is that what these Republican warhawks prefer? Going to war on bad intelligence (before it's too late)?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robinrenee

Agreed, I think it was becoming clear that Assad's grip on power was deteriorating and not going to survive this war of attrition against ISIS & Friends forever or much longer. Russia's now on it, and Assad's not going anywhere. We're not going to take Putin to court over this little spat over Syria, he'll take us and probably bake us.

One thing we did was impose a buffer zone between our aircraft and Russia's. That's the real no-fly zone. Hillary Clinton is talking about something completely different. I guess Hillary Clinton is going to tell Russia what airbases they can fly their Su-24s from so not to be confused with the Syrian Su-24s taking off from the same base and crossing into her No-fly zone. Is Putin even going to answer the phone when she calls?

Republicans are continuing the chorus line of "strong" "weak" leadership, implying that Obama should have invaded Syria in 2013 when that scum-for-intelligence about the chemicals wasn't disproven (sp) yet. Is that what these Republican warhawks prefer? Going to war on bad intelligence (before it's too late)?

Well, they ALMOST got their war. If it had not been for John Kerry's slip-of-the-tongue ultimatum about "turn in your chemical weapons or we'll bomb you.... " (something like that). And Putin says, "Give 'um to them." Oops.... :lol:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Ya have to laugh right? Otherwise it's just insane. :unsure:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robinrenee

I watched this the other day and I was impressed with Putin's dialogue, at least, if not his authenticity. From his pretty well objectively verified views on DOMESTIC social policies, I'm very much against him - he's got a pretty oppressive agenda that doesn't think much about self expression or civil liberties for "deviants", etc.

On the foreign policy stuff though, I actually am largely at least sympathetic to the gist of his statements, if not in agreement. The only real problem is that he seems to be a hypocrite, basically talking about US nation building and such, but he invades Ukraine, etc. But I also admit I'm not up on foreign policy or the full situation in all this.

I think like any politician, he's obviously not fully honest in any of his statements, but that's just how things are with leaders, so I am not sure how much of his apparent dishonesty is bias against HIM, due to being "suspicious" of him because of his general social oppression, and how much is natural world leader deception and playing things close to the vest. In a way, I support the STATED goals of Russia in Syria and think he probably can at least defeat ISIS in that region for now, though I fear a lot of innocents are going to die, even moreso than when the US hits clearly civilian hospitals. He also sent troops into Khazikstan, I read, probably to keep ISIS from getting a nearby foothold to come into Russia. That and having the byproduct, or perhaps main goal, of helping Assad, are all things that certainly stack up as questionable.

But I think, at least from the captions, that he made a lot of sense or at least spoke very well in this conference.

I kinda believe that the Russians were set up in Ukraine. Ukraine shares a border with Russia, and Eastern Ukraine is primarily ethnic Russians. With families on both sides of the border, some back and forth action of soldiers didn't mean anything ominous... until Soros and cronies started paying mercenaries to foment uprisings.

I think Ukraine unrest was part of the Anglo-American + NATO plan to tempt Russia into a border war with Ukraine. The US and NATO want war with Russia, but they want to wear them down first by throwing places like Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, (Eastern Europe)... under the bus. If Russia uses up enough resources (men, money, weapons. etc.), they would be easier to defeat in WW3.

But Russia wouldn't take the bait....

JMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Sergey Lavrov recently called the "Free Syrian Army" a "phantom", and Britain's former ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, agrees: "Virtually all the opposition armed groups in Syria are Islamist radicals, either ISIS, or interchangeable with ISIS."

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormalcy

I can't believe it's almost 2016 and we're still talking about WW3. It's like talking about the End of the World or perpetual motion machines or something. But there is some actual at least germ of possibility in it, I guess, as opposed to the rest. I'd like to think though, that saying "WW3" is like saying "This President is so unpopular he's going to get assassinate" - sort of an excited, fearful, hoping-to-see-a-disaster guardedly gleeful anticipation of doom, from the general populace at large, not necessarily any poster. I really think Mankind as a species have grown beyond this stupid BS. Why are people refusing to enter the 21st century?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

A lot of voices I'm hearing is the US should be focusing on this instead of who is leader of which nation that the US approves of ~

  • MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
    (in billions of dollars)
    HOLDINGS 1/ AT END OF PERIOD
    Aug Jul Jun May Apr Mar Feb Jan Dec Nov Oct Sep Aug
    Country 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014
    ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
    China, Mainland 1270.5 1268.8 1271.2 1270.3 1263.4 1261.0 1223.7 1239.1 1244.3 1250.4 1252.7 1266.3 1269.7
    Japan 1197.0 1200.8 1197.1 1214.9 1215.9 1226.9 1224.4 1238.6 1230.9 1241.5 1222.4 1221.8 1230.1
    Carib Bkg Ctrs 4/ 329.0 323.6 318.6 311.6 295.6 293.0 282.1 273.7 272.4 269.3 264.2 250.6 247.4
    Oil Exporters 3/ 293.2 298.4 296.7 296.8 292.9 297.3 296.8 290.8 285.9 278.9 281.8 279.4 267.5
    Brazil 255.3 257.9 256.3 258.5 262.7 261.5 259.9 256.5 255.8 264.2 261.7 262.3 261.7
    United Kingdom 2/ 222.8 212.9 214.7 199.5 195.6 200.6 192.3 207.4 188.9 174.3 171.3 167.8 172.7
    treasury gov full chart link
    Check out third and fourth on the list ... very interesting won't it be said ?
    ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

A lot of voices I'm hearing is the US should be focusing on this instead of who is leader of which nation that the US approves of ~

  • MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
    (in billions of dollars)
    HOLDINGS 1/ AT END OF PERIOD
    Aug Jul Jun May Apr Mar Feb Jan Dec Nov Oct Sep Aug
    Country 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014
    ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
    China, Mainland 1270.5 1268.8 1271.2 1270.3 1263.4 1261.0 1223.7 1239.1 1244.3 1250.4 1252.7 1266.3 1269.7
    Japan 1197.0 1200.8 1197.1 1214.9 1215.9 1226.9 1224.4 1238.6 1230.9 1241.5 1222.4 1221.8 1230.1
    Carib Bkg Ctrs 4/ 329.0 323.6 318.6 311.6 295.6 293.0 282.1 273.7 272.4 269.3 264.2 250.6 247.4
    Oil Exporters 3/ 293.2 298.4 296.7 296.8 292.9 297.3 296.8 290.8 285.9 278.9 281.8 279.4 267.5
    Brazil 255.3 257.9 256.3 258.5 262.7 261.5 259.9 256.5 255.8 264.2 261.7 262.3 261.7
    United Kingdom 2/ 222.8 212.9 214.7 199.5 195.6 200.6 192.3 207.4 188.9 174.3 171.3 167.8 172.7
    treasury gov full chart link
    Check out third and fourth on the list ... very interesting won't it be said ?
    ~

I question what the ramifications of that are to foreign policy. Will China slowly degrade into an Enemy when it no longer lends us as much money? Will WW3, or more likely another proxy war with China via our other rich Asian bankers, forgive the debt? There's big profit in conflict. How do we take advantage of the opportunity it creates?

It is very interesting, third_eye. What is #3? Caribbean Banking Centers, seriously?

Oil exporters? What the heck is that? How to hide Saudi Arabia from the list?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

From the footnotes on the link:

3/ Oil exporters include Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar,

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria.

4/ Caribbean Banking Centers include Bonaire, St. Eustatius, and Saba; Bahamas; Bermuda; Cayman Islands; Curacao; Saint Maarten; and

Panama.

Beginning with new series for June 2006, also includes British Virgin Islands.

Eh, look on the bright side, now we now that the money people stash in the Cayman Islands is used to buy US debt!

Oil exporters is a nice way of saying OPEC

Edited by Gromdor
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
Bonaire, St. Eustatius, and Saba; Bahamas; Bermuda; Cayman Islands; Curacao; Saint Maarten; and Panama.

I must admit I have never heard of not heard of five in that list before this ... :lol:

~ thank goodness for google maps eh ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Or thank goodness for Caribbeans. Whatever keeps the wars from starting.

Oil exporter Iran? Iran is being punished by economy-wide sanctions, their oil exports particularly but we're borrowing for Iranian oil exports anyway? So we're doing what we're not doing. How's that work? How does the right and wrong with the foreign policy on Iran manifest itself in the accounting of our debt? Wouldn't one think it would? Or are the sanctions really about us getting Iranian oil and keeping other powers like Russia from it? I thought the stated reason for the sanctions against Iran was because Iran was so bad a country beyond the pale.

ISIS takes over oil fields across Iraq and Syria and oil prices plunge to a multi-year low. Alternative energy? ISIS fighting global warming by keeping the oil away from us? Or does cheap oil mean we burn even more of it? I remember like it was yesterday how evil $100/bbl oil was during the Bush administration. It's amazing how a simple puppet change changes right and wrong.

And this list? This list is more reasonable now, now that we've fleshed it out? I think if Columbia, Chile, Taiwan and Luxembourg get their own row on the spreadsheet so should Saudi Arabia. What's the bureaucratic reason for lumping the oilies together exactly?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

THe plot thickens ...

`

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

I watched this the other day and I was impressed with Putin's dialogue, at least, if not his authenticity. From his pretty well objectively verified views on DOMESTIC social policies, I'm very much against him - he's got a pretty oppressive agenda that doesn't think much about self expression or civil liberties for "deviants", etc.

On the foreign policy stuff though, I actually am largely at least sympathetic to the gist of his statements, if not in agreement. The only real problem is that he seems to be a hypocrite, basically talking about US nation building and such, but he invades Ukraine, etc. But I also admit I'm not up on foreign policy or the full situation in all this.

I think like any politician, he's obviously not fully honest in any of his statements, but that's just how things are with leaders, so I am not sure how much of his apparent dishonesty is bias against HIM, due to being "suspicious" of him because of his general social oppression, and how much is natural world leader deception and playing things close to the vest. In a way, I support the STATED goals of Russia in Syria and think he probably can at least defeat ISIS in that region for now, though I fear a lot of innocents are going to die, even moreso than when the US hits clearly civilian hospitals. He also sent troops into Khazikstan, I read, probably to keep ISIS from getting a nearby foothold to come into Russia. That and having the byproduct, or perhaps main goal, of helping Assad, are all things that certainly stack up as questionable.

But I think, at least from the captions, that he made a lot of sense or at least spoke very well in this conference.

I agree completely. I even understand the action in Crimea (up to a point) but to set this man up as something better somehow is error IMO. He's just another power hungry leader and his rise on the stage is a natural consequence of a weak, vacillating US president that is surrounded by political ideologues who are totally out of their element dealing with geo-strategic concerns. There is room to criticize US policies, certainly. To assume that others in the world will handle things better is a real crap shoot though.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

I can't believe it's almost 2016 and we're still talking about WW3. It's like talking about the End of the World or perpetual motion machines or something. But there is some actual at least germ of possibility in it, I guess, as opposed to the rest. I'd like to think though, that saying "WW3" is like saying "This President is so unpopular he's going to get assassinate" - sort of an excited, fearful, hoping-to-see-a-disaster guardedly gleeful anticipation of doom, from the general populace at large, not necessarily any poster. I really think Mankind as a species have grown beyond this stupid BS. Why are people refusing to enter the 21st century?

I'm really curious as to why you'd believe that, Paranormalcy? I mean, what leads you to the conclusion that nations have fundamentally changed to the point where power and control are less important today than they have been historically? There is always a struggle for dominance and I believe there always will be. With nuclear weapons now becoming available to nearly any nation that can afford the process of creating them it is only a matter of time until one (or more) get used. Depending on who takes the hit we could easily find ourselves in a civilization ending conflict. There is a Jewish (mystical I believe) belief that the last great war will last 12 minutes. Sounds about right for the time it would take to launch everything...
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Look at the foreign policies of other countries. Any random sampling of 12 would do. Then look at ours. Why can't ours be more like theirs?

How does the innate human quest for power and control manifest itself in Swedish or Belgian or Swiss foreign policy? Is our nature based upon the coalition of the willing vs. the coalition of the unwilling? Like Putin asked in another conference of our response to 9/11, did we consult with the allies? "Hell no." said Putin. We unilaterally acted and then called our banners to come join us, under the auspices that they're either "with us or against us."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426

I can't believe it's almost 2016 and we're still talking about WW3. It's like talking about the End of the World or perpetual motion machines or something. But there is some actual at least germ of possibility in it, I guess, as opposed to the rest. I'd like to think though, that saying "WW3" is like saying "This President is so unpopular he's going to get assassinate" - sort of an excited, fearful, hoping-to-see-a-disaster guardedly gleeful anticipation of doom, from the general populace at large, not necessarily any poster. I really think Mankind as a species have grown beyond this stupid BS. Why are people refusing to enter the 21st century?

As a species? No, I don't think we have.

There are perhaps more people in the world today that are open-minded, progressive and imaginative.

The are still many, perhaps the majority, that are greedy, petty and can't see beyond the end of their noses though.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.