Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the Bush foreign policy in a nut shell, should, could, maybe, IF, would, and all of it "hidden" and secret and undetectable. Lack of evidence is proof of guilt. We now use "desire" as guilt.
So what we need is someone who isn't even looking for evidence, but a trading partner that we can engage with on an economic level rather than the old fear based model.
We spend more on our military than every other country in the world, combined. Thus, the need to stay in Iraq and support the permanent military bases, to justify the need for our grossly inflated "defense" budget.
I have no issue with a large defense budget, but I would rather see some of that money used to maintain Hurricane evacuation routes, nation wide rail industries that would allow us to move quickly between major cities, and a national power grid that rivals that of our interstate system.
I have no issue with a large defense budget, but I would rather see some of that money used to maintain Hurricane evacuation routes, nation wide rail industries that would allow us to move quickly between major cities, and a national power grid that rivals that of our interstate system.
Or maybe even using our defense budget for the DEFENSE of our borders? Now there's a thought.
I would like to see a debate on the floor of what exactly constitutes our "interest". Considering the vast size of our military apparatus that is spread to every corner of the globe and even reaches into space, how well defended are we? What are the realistic chances of terrorist crossing the border from Canada or Mexico into the United States and committing a terrorist act? What are the chances that a terrorist or dangerous materials or people could enter the country through the airports or shipping ports?
Foreign policy is indeed one of the most important and least openly discussed topics in our national dialog, and the discussion that does take place is very narrow and usually constitutes a range from Daniel Pipes to Richard Perle and this is not healthy. I hope that whoever is our next President that they will at least expand the opinion and discussion.
Foreign policy is indeed one of the most important and least openly discussed topics in our national dialog, and the discussion that does take place is very narrow and usually constitutes a range from Daniel Pipes to Richard Perle and this is not healthy. I hope that whoever is our next President that they will at least expand the opinion and discussion.
It won't happen until the electorate chooses to educate themselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
