US foreign policy is not just about wars that the US starts outright but about how the US reacts to crises abroad to damper or heighten them and how America deals with its friends, allies, enemies, adversaries and competitors.

I my lifetime, the US has had many foreign policy failures than achievements. I think the reason for that has a lot to do with an innate reliance on the military and far less attention paid to diplomacy. Of course, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why that is the way it is.

But, still, I was originally attracted to Senator Biden when I heard him speak of putting America's soft power and hard power in better balance. My favourite Biden quip goes something like this - America leads best when it leads by the power of its example rather than just by the example of its power.

When historians look back at US foreign policy during the first few decades of the 21st century (2001-present), they will invariably paint a picture of many squandered opportunities and lessons not learned amid many unwise choices, all of which have diminished America's global leadership possibilities.

Latest forever wars? For the record the US is no longer at war. Yep, 13 service members died but well over 100,000 were evacuated. The Afghanistan withdrawal was a “cleanup on isle Trump”.

Foreign Policy? Is this about Gaza?

I think we can ALL agree with that basic notion.

We have in no way whatsoever failed to understand the minority position (that of EM); we just disagree with it.

How can you disagree with it? You don't even appear to know what it is, let alone understand it.

I think it is because you read way too much between the lines and make too many wrong-headed assumptions. But, you're not alone in that regard. I guess it's hard for some not to jump to wild conclusions when they see things only the way they want to see them in order to engage by belittling instead of just being curious about how others see things.

Too bad Chris won't write about the latest forever wars that have put such a stain on the Biden legacy. But, then again, we can all see and understand what is happening on the ground - in both cases - and it is what it is.

@Liz,

we had this discussion last February.

We sure did. We also discussed some of the same issues on multiple other occasions. Elizabeth believes we don't understand her positions on (multiple) wars simply because we disagree with her.

i accept that you meant to imply something different from what the rest of us thought we'd read. probably best to leave it at that.

At its core, it seems to me that the vast majority of us agree that we have allies who are sovereign nations who are under attack and have a right to defend themselves whether or not we like the way they choose to do that.

We have in no way whatsoever failed to understand the minority position (that of EM); we just disagree with it.

we had this discussion last February. i accept that you meant to imply something different from what the rest of us thought we'd read. probably best to leave it at that.

JL

Well, you have time to search the archives because Chris probably won't be writing about US foreign policy until just this side of never. Heh.

I don’t recall you ever addressing this point [that the war is not Biden's or NATO's fault] and we watched as every so often you once again repeated all your appeasement surrender money nonsense.

Thanks for hurling another insult and for pulling a Trump and posting more of your wildly misinterpretations of what I have actually said. I'm done with you, offically.

I also agree.

And I’d remind everyone that whenever listening to any Republican say outrageous things often times they’re talking to their base who dwell in a right-wing information silo. Just because WE know BS when we hear it doesn’t mean that the base does. Hell, some of these people don’t know that the ACA and Obamacare are the same thing.

You said to me You don't want to engage with me, you want to insult me. And, I've stopped being a sucker for punishment. This place finally broke me of that bad habit.

But ‘tis YOU who have failed to engage. Failed to engage with

No it’s neither NATO’s nor Biden’s fault that Putin escalated. Putin started twenty plus years ago to extend Russian influence/control over all its neighbors in preparation for the NEXT invasion of the Motherland.This is what Russia has been doing for centuries.

I don’t recall you ever addressing this point and we watched as every so often you once again repeated all your appeasement surrender money nonsense.

sorry not sorry?

You got that right. I am never not sorry I am sorry not sorry. :)

On day one, he can outlaw bird flu testing. That will make it go away and the price of eggs will fall like no one's ever seen before.

John (not to be confused with the other John) is wholly correct about that bird flu testing and got me to thinking that this concept would indubitably also equally apply to a whole range of regulations put in place regarding the water we drink, the air we breathe, etc, in order to protect "We the People" and which Trump has promised the large-scale demolition of starting on "Day One."

Trump has promised to do away with the Inflation Reduction Act, referring to the "IRA" as the "Green New Deal." So it appears the IRA is the new ACA (so-called Obamacare), which by the way, the IRA extends important tax credit expansions for purchasing health insurance through the ACA marketplaces. If the IRA's enhanced subsidies expire, the vast majority of ACA enrollees will see their premium payments increase significantly.

So "here we go again" and "lather, rinse, repeat" with the effing with (or possible failed attempt to eff with) We the People's healthcare in order to further lower taxes for corporations and the affluent.

Nice post John M. You seem to me to be opining that Donald Trump is deep in the throes of malignant narcissism combined with the effects of his ongoing ever-declining brain addled with demonstrable dementia.

I agree 100%. If You Know, You Know. Period. :)

You really surprise me sometimes.

I am thinking "right back atcha" if you're saying you cannot recall the myriad times you discussed what Ukraine/Zelenskyy should have done versus their chosen response.

Don't you remember what I said to those commenters? I have made no proclamations or recommendations for Ukraine.

You simply cannot be serious. I could not throw a rock into recent years' archives without hitting an Elizabeth Miller declaration/recommendation for how Ukraine should have responded versus how they did and the responding comments of multiple posters containing words (not limited to) "revanchism" and "appeasement."

Please, before posting nonsense like this, review the record!

From my point of view, you appear to be "asking for it," and I am going to be nice today and not give it to you. :)

On day one, he can outlaw bid flu testing. That will make it go away and the price of eggs will fall like no one's ever seen before.

But, I don't expect world leaders or leaders in the US and definitely not the media and certainly not pols in my country to ignore him or even figure out how to effectively deal with him.

They've all had a decade to work it out and they haven't come close.

"Perhaps I am wrong -- perhaps it is just Trump's deteriorating mind and his penchant for fleeting monomania about the silliest of ideas."

But you reject that possiblity, as if it is a mere rhetorical device connoting commentariat humility, and go on for many paragraphs about T's strategies, ideas, and tactics for covering his ass when his campaign promises prove impossible to achieve.

But I suggest you are right in your doubts. I suggest he is deeply into his dementia course, and almost everything he says these days is not just BS, but unstrategized BS. It's just "Trump's deteriorating mind and his penchant for fleeting monomania about the silliest of ideas."

But this is too damned bad, Chris might object, along with the rest of the analytic press corps. How can we write long informed essays on T's devious politics, if in fact there is no devious politics, there is simply nonsensical insanity and meaninglessness?

Well, yeah. Maybe bend to the winds, and accept it. The guy has lost it. Write about something else instead. Too bad he's going to be president and all, but really, even after he takes the oath on the 20th of this month, anything he says is going to be meaningless drivel. You can't analyze meaningless drivel from your honed political commentator's wisdom and experience. You just come off silly if you do.

I don't have much hope, but maybe the so-called press corps will sooner rather than later realize that the next president of the U.S. must be actively ignored in the name of sense, logic, and honesty.

Do you not remember several conversations on this very blog wherein you were questioned by multiple commenters wondering what the sovereign nation of Canada would do if America decided to attack it and querying whether it would or would it not resemble the proclamations and recommendations you'd made repeatedly for our ally Ukraine?

You really surprise me sometimes.

Don't you remember what I said to those commenters? I have made no proclamations or recommendations for Ukraine. Please, before posting nonsense like this, review the record!

You really surprise me sometimes.

Don't you remember what I said to those commenters? I have made no proclamations or recommendations for Ukraine. Please, before posting nonsense like this, review the record!

And, yet you continue to be confused about what my position is on the sovereign nation of Ukraine and amusingly try to equate the Ukraine/Russia situation with that of Canada/US. I have explained many times why that is not an apt analogy.

For facts sake, you are again misinterpreting a very valid simple point with an attempt at false equivalency. At the present time, this obviously ain't that, and in the past 'twasn't either. :)

And before you start scolding me, what was that phrase of yours again ... you just said it ... oh, right ... what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Actually, what I said was: "What's good for the gander is good for the Canada Goose," in totally unambiguous language so you've obviously gone and gotten it bass ackwards in demonstrably so-who-is-the-actual-clueless-one fashion.

Do you not remember several conversations on this very blog wherein you were questioned by multiple commenters wondering what the sovereign nation of Canada would do if America decided to attack it and querying whether it would or would it not resemble the proclamations and recommendations you'd made repeatedly for our ally Ukraine? Rhetorical question.

Yes, I'm teasing you and simultaneously wondering if you might have noticed or maybe not noticed current events that resembled multiple of our past conversations. I did. :)

And, yet you continue to be confused about what my position is on the sovereign nation of Ukraine and amusingly try to equate the Ukraine/Russia situation with that of Canada/US. I have explained many times why that is not an apt analogy.

What you don't know about my position on the sovereign nation of Ukraine is a lot. Even after I have explained over and over and over again in the kind of language you should be able to understand.

Yes, I am definitely not a mind reader; however, you do routinely and repetitively use language in your posts that aren't the least bit complicated, convoluted, serpentine, and/or tortuous.

You're as clueless as Trump.

So you're saying I'm presidential. :)

Why couldn't he? Trump could sign an Executive Order on "Day One" that mandates:

(a) egg producers must label their products as "Trump spawned caviar," and

(b) bacon producers must label their products as "Trump ass slices"

and then watch the prices plummet due to lower demand because of the force of Trump's own personality. :)

Heh.

What you don't know about my position on the sovereign nation of Ukraine is a lot. Even after I have explained over and over and over again in the kind of language you should be able to understand.

You're as clueless as Trump.

Dearest Canada: Might I suggest there's no way you could ever win a war against imperialist America and therefore should assume the position you've suggested multiple times for the sovereign nation of Ukraine. What's good for the gander is good for the Canada Goose. ;)

Today he floated a new idea, this one not a land-grab but instead of a sort of water-grab: he wants to rename the Gulf of Mexico the "Gulf of America," for no particular reason (other than to annoy Mexico, one assumes).

"Gulf of America"? Might I propose a more appropriate name change? Yes, I definitely will:

Gulf
Of
Trump
Cock
Holstering
Assholes

Hey, if you don't think the name GOTCHA fits, kindly name me a state (any state) located along that (currently named) "Gulf of Mexico" wherein the majority of voters doesn't fit that description.

So then... I rest my very valid case. :)

It's going to be a long 4 years of a demented old fool executive ordering clouds to get out of the way...