Guest Post – 3 Ways To Get Rid of American Foreign Policy

By: | December 31, 2014 |
  1. steveinsocal | at 3:18 pm

    “Foreign Policy” is in reality intertwined with “Commercial Interests” and “Political Expediency” – it’s the only reason (that and harbouring a grudge) I can think of that illustrates that the US is more than prepared to do business with a host of nations who arguably have worse human rights records than that little island just off of the coast of Florida.

    Unfortunately there’s also an old adage that says that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter (after all, how did this nation come to be formed?) It’s also probably true that “we never negotiate with terrorists” is just PR. As an example, there was over 30 years of armed strife in both Northern Ireland and the UK. To the vast majority of the population of the UK, the IRA et al (and to be honest, their Unionist counterparts, the UDA and UDF) were terrorist organisations – although bizarrely the US government didn’t think so – until 9/12 that is (see political expediency). As has been well documented violence and atrocities on one side begat the same on the other. Thankfully – and realising the futility – the UK Government and the IRA (through Sinn Fein) did meet in secret – there were negotiations – prisoners were released, miscarriages of justice were attempted to be put right… And while it’s probably safer to say that Northern Ireland has an uneasy peace, it is surely better that my government and terrorists organisations did negotiate?

    North Korea and Sony Pictures is – IMHO – not a good example of US Foreign Policy (non) intervention. I suspect that the US’ reputation has always been tarnished within the Hermit Kingdom(!) and ultimately Sony are a Japanese company. You could argue that the decisions the company made were ultimately based upon commercial and business decisions (see my first sentence) since even by Hollywood’s appalling standards the film sucks… There’s also a great deal of debate amongst security consultants as to whether this was an inside job…

    • Janice Wald | at 11:58 pm

      Hi Steve,
      Thank you so much for your thoughtful, detailed, and eloquent argument. I have five responses to what you wrote.
      1. You’re quite knowledgeable about this situation. Thank you for filling me in on some of the missing pieces that I didn’t know.
      2. Funny line–“We don’t negotiate with terrorists” is just PR!I don’t know that I agree with you. I am an idealist, but what leverage would we have if we did negotiate? If terrorists knew this, we’d have no leverage. Thus, Gross and Bergdahl. I have always worshipped Obama, but even after I wrote this I heard he gave up more men in exchange that he received in return. I’m glad we have Americans home. If he has to negotiate or swap, why not equity? Why do we keep getting fewer than we are giving up?
      3. Sorry, What does IMHO mean?
      4. I loved your reference to the American Revolution.
      5. If the Sony hacking was an inside job, what would the possible motive be?
      Happy New Year to you and your family. Thanks again for writing and such a thoughtful response.
      Did you notice I am consistently using hyper links since you wrote? Your influence, which I appreciate greatly.
      6. Regarding the tagline. I am trying an experiment and only planning on writing advice this week, so for now the tagline stays unchanged.
      Take care,
      Janice

Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

LinkedIn
Share
Instagram
%d bloggers like this: