Foreign Policy, world affairs

[Ron]

The political forum has been pretty dominated by domestic affairs for a bit with the Afghanistan pulling out generating the most activity.

The sabre rattling around Ukraine, Taiwan, Russia and China isn't getting a lot of traction here.

Hopefully this a nationwide trend and leads to some national introspection and housecleaning.

[MechAg94]

That would be stuff I have little or no control over.  I don't like us getting our noses involved in every little issue around the world.  It just upsets everyone and undermines our influence when something actually important is happening. 

[dogmush]

Hopefully this a nationwide trend and leads to some national introspection and housecleaning.

I wouldn't hold your breath.  This pause is just until a really good distraction is needed.

Or a screaming beard gets lucky again.

[French G.]

International weakness, disengagement and isolationism has traditionally netted us really big messes when we finally pull our head out of the sand. We are all going to pay for a long time for our current demonstrated weakness.

[MechAg94]

International weakness, disengagement and isolationism has traditionally netted us really big messes when we finally pull our head out of the sand. We are all going to pay for a long time for our current demonstrated weakness.

Weakness I agree. 

Isolationism and disengagement are an entirely different and extended discussion I think.   

[French G.]

He kept us out of war. How’d that go? Peace at any price, worked for the brits. I am not into nation building but a 2002 George bush or a FAFO trump keeps things quiet. Be isolated all you want but there is going to be a big dog loose in the world and we can be it or be owned by it.

[MechAg94]

He kept us out of war. How’d that go? Peace at any price, worked for the brits. I am not into nation building but a 2002 George bush or a FAFO trump keeps things quiet. Be isolated all you want but there is going to be a big dog loose in the world and we can be it or be owned by it.

Maybe it depends on what you mean by isolated.  I just question the need to station troops all over the world and have active special operations soldiers everywhere.   

Both W. Bush and Trump were not the type to take attacks/threats lightly and most of our enemies knew it.  IMO, Clinton enabled 9/11 by failing to respond meaningfully to the previous WTC attack (and embassy bombings and Black Hawk Down, and USS Cole, etc.).  That hits the "Weakness" part of the equation.  I am not saying we should never go to war or not be willing to fight.  I think it just pays to be careful how we use our military so we don't get bogged down in 20 year wars/occupations that don't end up helping us a great deal.  I think W. Bush failed on that one.


Just how many terror attacks happened against the US and US troops during the Clinton years?  I am sure I am forgetting some. 

[RoadKingLarry]

He kept us out of war. How’d that go? Peace at any price, worked for the brits. I am not into nation building but a 2002 George bush or a FAFO trump keeps things quiet. Be isolated all you want but there is going to be a big dog loose in the world and we can be it or be owned by it.

There are two contenders for "big dog" when it isn't the US. China and Russia. We gave up Panama and the Chinese moved right in. From what I understand now that we are out of Afghanistan China has moved in there with aims to exploit their rare earth mineral resources.

[Hawkmoon]

There are two contenders for "big dog" when it isn't the US. China and Russia. We gave up Panama and the Chinese moved right in. From what I understand now that we are out of Afghanistan China has moved in there with aims to exploit their rare earth mineral resources.

China doesn't take over by military force -- they just buy out infrastructure. Sooner of later they'll have half the world by the balls.

Like in Uganda: https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/china/china-to-takeover-ugandas-only-international-airport-over-loan-default-reports.html

China funded the county's major international airport, then foreclosed when Uganda defaulted on the loan.

My late wife was from South America. There's a major highway in her country, with expensive tolls every few miles. At some point I expressed some questions about how the country had built the highway and the answer was that China built it, and China was collecting the tolls to pay for it. I guess if you really need a highway maybe that can be excused, but it seems to me that allowing a foreign power to potentially control your country's primary infrastructure is a monumentally stupid way to govern.

[MechAg94]

China doesn't take over by military force -- they just buy out infrastructure. Sooner of later they'll have half the world by the balls.

Like in Uganda: https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/china/china-to-takeover-ugandas-only-international-airport-over-loan-default-reports.html

China funded the county's major international airport, then foreclosed when Uganda defaulted on the loan.

My late wife was from South America. There's a major highway in her country, with expensive tolls every few miles. At some point I expressed some questions about how the country had built the highway and the answer was that China built it, and China was collecting the tolls to pay for it. I guess if you really need a highway maybe that can be excused, but it seems to me that allowing a foreign power to potentially control your country's primary infrastructure is a monumentally stupid way to govern.

Eventually they may just decided to take it over like some did to US oil facilities.  I imagine China spreads enough money around to try to avoid that.

[HankB]

China doesn't take over by military force -- they just buy out infrastructure. Sooner of later they'll have half the world by the balls.

Like in Uganda: https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/china/china-to-takeover-ugandas-only-international-airport-over-loan-default-reports.html

China funded the county's major international airport, then foreclosed when Uganda defaulted on the loan.

My late wife was from South America. There's a major highway in her country, with expensive tolls every few miles. At some point I expressed some questions about how the country had built the highway and the answer was that China built it, and China was collecting the tolls to pay for it. I guess if you really need a highway maybe that can be excused, but it seems to me that allowing a foreign power to potentially control your country's primary infrastructure is a monumentally stupid way to govern.

News Flash: Foreign companies own toll roads in the USA as well - the major player seems to be Cintra, a Spanish company.

https://www.thetruckersreport.com/foreign-company-now-owns-six-major-us-tolls-roads/

I heard that here in the Lone Star State, part of the deal included an agreement that the state would not improve alternate routes to the toll roads. Wonder what considerations were paid to whoever on "our" side inked the deal.

With most countries, if they have a falling out with their creditors, they'll just nationalize the foreign holdings. With the USA, a lot of our politicians will side with the foreigners, even in the worst of times. (Which of course begs the question - how many foreign "art investors" are buying Hunter Biden paintings?)