Around 46:35 Graham Fuller, speaking with Pascal Lottaz about how democracies can be more dangerous than other forms of government when it comes to foreign policy.
Not an argument for adopting an authoritarian form of government, but recognizing limitations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqmnLR_HGzg
Harvard Professor Stephen M. Walt has a column at Foreign Policy with the title The United States Couldn't Stop Being Stupid If It Wanted To.
There is a subtitle, For Washington, self-imposed restraint will always be a contradiction in terms.
Well, yes.
Just this little tidbit is worth it,
Now, we wouldn't be posting this except, his article is an argument for attaining a neutralist ethos in foreign policy, even if he does not realize it.
Of late, Bernie Sanders has seemed to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat establishment.
So, it was a bit surprising when he, according to an Dave DeCamp antiwar.com article told The Intercept on Monday that he could bring a Yemen War Powers Resolution to the floor of the Senate for a vote “hopefully next week.”
Putting aside the silly use of "hopefully," it is a welcome development why Sen. Sanders is do it, we applaud him,
Not sure if this is happening because the Saudis are dancing away from our relationship with them, but we hope it passes no matter the impetus.
Dave put this also in the article:
Call 1-833-Stop-War to tell your senator to support the legislation, which would end US support for the Saudi war and blockade on Yemen
Great idea.
Wicked Shockah, George Will does not like Putin. Yeah, like you're going to lose a gig for going after the Russian leader. Remember how he got Iraq right? No, he was goofy then, he is goofy now.
Anyway, linked below is my article on how silly the George Will WAPO column is. the man compares Mussolini and Putin. The comparison is ridiculous.
George Will speaks ex-cathedra at WAPO-Actually, he just mails it in.
Eric Zuesse has written an article that lists Ten Truths That Can’t Be Published Under The U.S. Regime.
The Neutralist tried to post it on Twitter and got this message:
“We can’t complete this request because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful.”
Thus, they made the case for Mr. Zuesse.
As to where the Regime begins and Twitter ends, we leave to others to study.
We endorse the link.
The title says it all. At the website of the Quincy Institute, Responsible Statecraft, Anatol Lieven about the US poking the Bear to no purpose.
To quote the Professor:
"Simply put, the Georgia-Russia War of 2008 should teach us that to arm other countries for war with more powerful neighbors when you have no intention of fighting to save them is not only irresponsible, it is deeply immoral."
Post-Cold War American foreign policy has a lot of immorality about it and needs to stop.
Unfortunately, the Biden administration seems to be blundering in a lot of places.
Stephen Kinzer nails it in his February 18, 2021 Boston Globe column. He shouldn't have to, we should've been long gone from Afghanistan, but we aren't and if some foreign policy goofs have their way, we may never.
Worth a read anyway:
Saudi Arabia is a tyranny of vast proportions and yet it has love in certain American circles. If you asked your garden variety progressive if we should have ever had diplomatic relations with the German National Socialist regime, they would probably say no.
If you ask should we have them with Saudi Arabia, you would probably draw a blank. Over time, it can be argued the KSA regime is worse, but none of the cool kids are going to over-worry about it, just as Julian Assange is not a thing for them.
Doug Bandow is not asleep, however. He looks at the love that is being given to the kingdom:
Now that the world's worst president has been replaced by the world's worst president, the pursuit of a whistleblower continues.
... where Israel is headed: toward a massive confrontation with the various powers arrayed against it, a confrontation that will suck America in, and perhaps terminate the experiment that is Israel, and do irreparable damage to the empire that America has become.
The U.S. must rapidly change how it is executing policy in five key areas.
Russian military bases. ...Acceptance of Bashar al-Assad. ...Syrian “de-escalation.” ...The “peace” process. ...Iran and al Qaeda. ...
The hinted at solutions, couched in vague language, are for 1. nuke them, 2. kill him, 3. stop it, 4. who cares, 5. destroy 'em all:
The U.S. must face reality in Syria. It must recognize the threat Russia poses. It must acknowledge the limits of its current partners on the ground. It cannot put faith in a diplomatic charade. It must implement a real strategy against al Qaeda and Iran. And it must recognize the value of American action over American rhetoric.Two administrations have sought to substitute rhetoric for action and to outsource American interests to local partners. The U.S. must abandon this approach and recognize Syria’s importance to American security.It will take a long time and a hard struggle to achieve any outcome in Syria that the U.S. should be willing to live with. It is time to focus on it, devote resources to it, and prepare to do so for a long time.
Democratic Reps. Khanna and Pocan and Republican Reps. Massie and Jones are the co-sponsors of the bill, and they deserve a lot of credit for working on this and bringing attention to a conflict and our government’s role in it. The U.S. role in supporting the war should receive much more scrutiny than it has, and this bill provides members of Congress with the opportunity to debate the indefensible policy that has implicated the U.S. in the crimes of the Saudis and their allies. One of the reasons that U.S. support for the war has gone on for so long with so little opposition is that Congress has failed to challenge the Obama and Trump administrations’ decisions to back the coalition. This bill offers the chance to do what Congress should have been doing for the last two years.
Democratic Reps. Khanna and Pocan and Republican Reps. Massie and Jones are the co-sponsors of the bill, and they deserve a lot of credit for working on this and bringing attention to a conflict and our government’s role in it. The U.S. role in supporting the war should receive much more scrutiny than it has, and this bill provides members of Congress with the opportunity to debate the indefensible policy that has implicated the U.S. in the crimes of the Saudis and their allies. One of the reasons that U.S. support for the war has gone on for so long with so little opposition is that Congress has failed to challenge the Obama and Trump administrations’ decisions to back the coalition. This bill offers the chance to do what Congress should have been doing for the last two years.
U.S. involvement in the war is not only unauthorized, but it is enabling the commission of war crimes and other violations of international law. Ending that involvement could also be the first step in forcing the coalition to halt its campaign and blockade. All House members should join their four colleagues in calling for a stop to U.S. backing for the disgraceful and atrocious war on Yemen.
An America First foreign policy would be one of neutrality. The United States regularly takes sides in civil wars, territorial disputes, and controversies in other nations, in addition to picking winners and losers. It should instead remain neutral. Neutrality guarantees a noninterventionist foreign policy. It checks presidential power, it prevents hatred of America and Americans, it doesn’t create enemies and terrorists, it respects the sovereignty of other nations, it keeps U.S. soldiers from dying unnecessarily, it doesn’t cost anything, and it ensures that the military is not misused. Not remaining neutral does not put America first.
"But the threat is largely self-induced. That is, Washington could easily deflate the fantastic nightmare of a North Korean nuclear attack on America by leaving the Korean Peninsula."Bandow further states
Which leaves the debate over U.S. policy in full swing in Washington. Doing nothing is not a good option. The North would just continue to develop missiles and nukes. It already may have enough material for about 20 weapons. Some estimates have Pyongyang possessing 50 or even 100 weapons within a few years. Sticking around Northeast Asia while passively watching events would be foolish at best, dangerous at worst.
You too might have thought that the world would have distanced itself from John Yoo, but no, he found a nice spot as a professor at Berkeley. Wonder what he feels about his place of employment as that Madrassa has no problem with masked thugs suppressing speech.
Yoo’s legal reasoning, as he (together with his superior Jay Bybee, who’s now a federal judge) advised the Bush White House, is that “the Department of Justice could not enforce Section 2340A [the federal probation against torture] against federal officials acting pursuant to the President’s constitutional authority to wage a military campaign.” In other words, the president can’t crush a 6-year-old boy’s testicles for fun, but if he thinks some child-testicle-crushing is needed to win the war, it’s totally constitutional.
Immigration has driven Mr. Trump even deeper into the constitutional thickets. Even though his executive order halting immigration from seven Muslim nations makes for bad policy, I believe it falls within the law. But after the order was issued, his adviser Rudolph Giuliani disclosed that Mr. Trump had initially asked for “a Muslim ban,” which would most likely violate the Constitution’s protection for freedom of religion or its prohibition on the state establishment of religion, or both — no mean feat. Had Mr. Trump taken advantage of the resources of the executive branch as a whole, not just a few White House advisers, he would not have rushed out an ill-conceived policy made vulnerable to judicial challenge.So we bomb and torture people in MENA and Yoo is okay with that. Those folks may not harbor affection for us and understandably may want to harm us. The new president may believe that Muslims from disaffected regions may want to do that. Is that in the "constitutional thickets?"
I am not sure if Trump completely means this. Rumors of nominating Elliott Abrams as Deputy Secretary of State are not reassuring. Nevertheless, the quote, while not neutralist, is a better sentiment than anything Mr. Yoo or any neocon has ever come up with."We will destroy ISIS. At the same time, we will pursue a new foreign policy that finally learns from the mistakes of the past. We will stop looking to topple regimes and overthrow governments, folks," Trump told attendees at the U.S. Bank Arena. "Our goal is stability, not chaos because we wanna rebuild our country. It's time.""In our dealings with other countries, we will seek shared interests wherever possible and pursue a new era of peace, understanding, and good will."
