I was reading a news article about Palin meeting with heads of various foreign countries, here you can even read it here if you like although the article isn't what I'm here to discuss.

What I want to talk about is a comment that was left by someone who read the article and thought to express themselves.

Pat attention to the second statement, the one about the nukes.
How common is the mentality in America that people think because we're the strongest that everyone should do what we want? I know I don't think that way, but I know it would be naive to think that nobody thought that way.

Is it just me or does this line of thought seem a little bully-ish?

__________________
We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold...
-Hunter S. Thompson



Imagine all the people, sharing all the world.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
and the world will live as one.
-John Lennon

While we're at it, who else thinks Palin doesn't need a foreign policy to lead?

__________________
We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold...
-Hunter S. Thompson



Imagine all the people, sharing all the world.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
and the world will live as one.
-John Lennon

I'd rather have a VICE president without a foreign policy, than a PRESIDENT whose policy is to grovel at the feet of our enemies.

It still makes me laugh that the liberals keep comparing Obama to Palin. No one is comparing McCain to Biden, and they definitely never compared Bush to Edwards, in the last election.

__________________
"I should be calling collect from jail for the things I commit each night in my head" - D. Mustaine.

It is very bully-ish. I never understood the outrage at a nuclear Iran or a nuclear N. Korea, when we have more nukes than anyone else and we're the only nation in history to have actually used one. I don't feel that having the strongest military or the strongest economy makes us better than any other nation. I would hope that all nations are equal. This isn't a college football game. Rooting for the home team is great, but we're no better than anyone else simply because we were born American.

I don't know that anyone needs foreign policy experience to lead. All you really need is the ability to communicate with other world leaders. Look at Cheney. He has oodles of foreign policy experience. Did that help?

I don't compare Obama to Palin. I compare him to McCain. Me personally, I'd rather have a president who could communicate with other leaders to one whose first option is attack.

I've been hearing lately that McCain's strength in a debate with Obama will be his directness. How he doesn't think about his answers, he just blurts them out. By contrast Obama has been called a stutterer and his use of "um" while talking has been disparaged.

So you would rather have a candidate who doesn't think about his answers (to questions and problems), than a candidate who ponders the question before answering? When did thinking become such an anathema?

In regards to the comment on the article, it does seem bully-ish and not all Americans think that way.

As for Palin, she doesnt need foreign experience to be Vice President. The role of Vice President depends how the President uses him/her, it could be a major role or a minor role. For foreign policy is also why we have the ambassadors and The Secretary of State and the President himself.

16 Presidents have started off as Governors first then to President, without any real foreign credentials, most modern ones include Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, FDR.

Thank you for your opinion, but do you also think that our 28,000 nuclear warheads entitles us to police the world? Since that seams to be our current foreign policy and I'm in doubt of it's effectiveness.

__________________
We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold...
-Hunter S. Thompson



Imagine all the people, sharing all the world.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
and the world will live as one.
-John Lennon

To a certain extent I agree... and that is my defense of Obama.
Of course it's not entirely the truth, is it? Sure it doesn't matter so much- cabinet and all... but it's flat-out wrong to say that neither Obama nor Palin have a foreign policy, isn't it?

Obama has a foreign policy ideology based on smart and realistic diplomacy. He depends on experts when he doesn't have a knowledge base.
Palin is anti-intellectual by nature and has a tendency to just parrot idealistic hawkish mantras. I cannot trust that she will depend on experts or appoint good ones. There is no sense of realism in her positions.

And I think she exemplifies the kind of dimwitted bullyishness that is found in the post the OP highlights... Indeed it is one of the reasons people like the originator of the nukes comment like her.
That's the problem... Lack of foreign policy experience does not mean lack of ideology... and Palin's is the pits.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

When you have the president of a country that openly calls for the destruction of Israel and is supporting terrorists in Iraq, I certainly CAN understand the outrage of a nuclear ANYONE! I also don't think having the strongest military or economy will make that much of a difference when it comes to diplomacy. Look how long the strongest military in the world is taking to subdue terrorists in Iraq, not to mention the costs!

America's military is strongest in the sense, that if anyone attacks us, our retaliation will be swift and complete. The same goes for having 28,000 nukes. I can't imagine we'd ever get out way by threatening anyone with a nuclear attack, since Russia would be right there pointing a couple nukes down our throat.

[quote=Loathor;808555]
I don't know that anyone needs foreign policy experience to lead. All you really need is the ability to communicate with other world leaders. Look at Cheney. He has oodles of foreign policy experience. Did that help?

No it certainly didn't seem to.

That all depends on whether the answers are good or not. Someone who blurts out an answer is relying on their instincts to guide them, and as far as I'm concerned I do want someone who is not basing the presidency on their primal instincts.

__________________
We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold...
-Hunter S. Thompson



Imagine all the people, sharing all the world.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
and the world will live as one.
-John Lennon

Our retaliation for being attacked has been neither swift nor complete. Having the strongest military doesn't seem to be doing us much good on that front. Especially when its mis-used.

And as for our nukes not being a threat because of a Russian response... we are putting up a missile defense shield to "protect Poland" which would give us a first strike weapon that can't be answered. That scares me a whole lot more than a nuclear armed Iran.

The whole safety net of mutually assured destruction goes out the window when your enemy can't fight back.

So lets say your Iran. America seems to be targeting you for its next war. What would you do? Would you sit back and wait for a similar destruction that you just witnessed happen to your neighbor?

Even today we continue to breed hatred and fear throughout the world. We are quickly becoming the worst terrorists in this supposed "War on Terror".

Good point, I must admit, I strongly agree that the reason for this is that we are waging the wrong kind of war. Terrorists attacked us on 9/11 and it is a war on terror we are fighting, so where exactly did exactly did this trillion dollar troop presence in Iraq come from? If we're going to wage a war on terror, let's do it for God's sake. We need much more comprehensive intelligence then the one that linked terrorists to Iraq. You don't 100,000 troops to fight terrorists.

It definitely should scare us, since America is far more likely to use Nuke's offensively/preemptively then any other country. But this missile defense system is not foolproof, and what it seems like is just a way to goad the Russians into doing something. It really is starting to feel like an arms race.

Certainly, even if Iran we're looking to make Nuclear weapon's, it's hard to imagine they'd use them at risk of getting blown off the Earth. More likely it is so they can attain the same kind of leverage other countries with Nukes have. It also acts as a nice defense mechanism.


No, I'd enrich that uranium as fast as you can, giving America all the more reason to fear and hate me. But if I have nukes then maybe America will not be so quick to invade, since war is something that is counterproductive for both of us. Of course it is only counterproductive to America if I have no intention of waging war on anyone with my brand new toys.

I firmly believe that America should do what they can to stop Iran from attaining nuclear weapons, even if it involves waging war. Nobody in the world should have nukes, and before we can start getting rid of the ones there are, we should first make sure nobody else can start making them.


As long as we hold on to the belief that we can do what we want because everyone is afraid of us, then one day we'll find we're engaged on too many fronts and spread to thin, and all the people who once held back because they were afraid won't be so afraid anymore.

__________________
We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold...
-Hunter S. Thompson



Imagine all the people, sharing all the world.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
and the world will live as one.
-John Lennon