Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alberta's Child
Scowcroft is making precisely the same point that George W. Bush made as a candidate in 2000 when he adamantly opposed the use of the U.S. military for futile exercises in nation-building.

We had an intervening event between W's election and the invasion of Iraq -- 9/11. That changed the geopolitical calculus. It's a poor President indeed that cannot adapt his foreign policy to changing circumstances.

11 posted on 10/28/2005 4:30:48 AM PDT by Cincinatus (Omnia relinquit servare Republicam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Cincinatus

Good post. Interesting that even under Reagan there was a "realistic" approach to most foreign policy. It was the US approach and until Reagan set out to destabilize the USSR indirectly with the war in Afghanistan did we change a little. Panama and Granada were more in keeping with the Monroe Doctrine than a break with "realism".

However, as you point out, since 9/11 the US has shed the "realistic" policy in some parts of the world, but we are still in that mode in others. The State Department does not like hard work and a "realistic" Foreign Policy requires it only to keep the status quo while one that promotes the spread of democracy requires work, intelligence and perseverance, three things lacking in our State Department.


18 posted on 10/28/2005 4:48:28 AM PDT by KeyWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson