One of the many topics which have effectively divided our major political parties amongst themselves is on foreign policy and the direction that candidates wish to take on our current and foreseeable armed conflicts in the world. President Obama has received heavy bombardment from the Right on his foreign policies starting from being too soft, and now even being hypocritical because of the most recent U.S. involvement in Libya (as Bush?s actions in Afghanistan and Iraq were unpopular). The question being asked is?where are the anti-war protestors now with a Democrat in office? How can a man who won the Nobel Peace Prize conduct such an act? How the Right crafts its arguments for 2012 on foreign policy based on the actions taken by the current administration right now will demonstrate either their total hypocrisy on foreign policy for the sake of partisan gain, or yet another example to the politically-aware that both parties have no intention of making any progressive or peaceful strides in foreign policy now or in the future.
Lines will no doubt be drawn in 2012 on other major issues such as healthcare (repeal or no repeal), the economy (spending or cutting), and taxes (higher or lower, and for who). It is my opinion that as the public continuously gets played with like a human dangling a treat over a dog?s head, that we will be drawn into yet another distraction away from the governmental actions which are going to cost us more money, individual rights, and lives. As the last election was more about ?hope? and ?change? away from the 8 years of Bush rather than a defined plan, the 2012 election we will most likely be distracted by more trivial controversies and broad platitudes as past trends demonstrate. Nonetheless, what is occurring now in the Middle East and how we handle our military involvement in such issues will clearly mark which politicians in 2012 are truly progressive or if they are more of the big spending, war mongering, pseudo-civil servants of a ?free? society that we have become accustomed to.
The potentially real progressives like Ron Paul and David Kucinich ? both opposite political parties ? see the current use of our military in Libya and in 2003 with Iraq as actions outside the confines of the Constitution. The ever-growing disconnect between the war-making powers of the Executive branch and the restrictive powers of the Legislative branch in our government is becoming more evident no matter which person or party hold the presidency. This alarming trend from unpopular conflicts like Vietnam, to our 2 skirmishes in raq, and now in Libya (and hopefully not Iran) goes to show us that the true change must come from our thoughts about what the proper role of the U.S. should be in the policing the world and how foreign policy should be conducted.
How much longer can we allow these warring executive powers to disregard the existence of our Congress in getting approval to use our armed forces and risk lives for the sake of political moves within other nations?
We managed to not conduct military actions against the Soviet union for nearly half a century despite their tyrannical government, efforts to massively build weapons of mass destruction, and engage in hostile actions against the U.S. Why can we not act with such poise and wisdom now with nations much smaller and less of a threat than the Soviet Union ever was to us?
The biggest problem is that we are asking the wrong questions of our runaway leaders. Too many When?s and Where?s instead of the more important How?s, If?s and Why?s?
Lines will no doubt be drawn in 2012 on other major issues such as healthcare (repeal or no repeal), the economy (spending or cutting), and taxes (higher or lower, and for who). It is my opinion that as the public continuously gets played with like a human dangling a treat over a dog?s head, that we will be drawn into yet another distraction away from the governmental actions which are going to cost us more money, individual rights, and lives. As the last election was more about ?hope? and ?change? away from the 8 years of Bush rather than a defined plan, the 2012 election we will most likely be distracted by more trivial controversies and broad platitudes as past trends demonstrate. Nonetheless, what is occurring now in the Middle East and how we handle our military involvement in such issues will clearly mark which politicians in 2012 are truly progressive or if they are more of the big spending, war mongering, pseudo-civil servants of a ?free? society that we have become accustomed to.
The potentially real progressives like Ron Paul and David Kucinich ? both opposite political parties ? see the current use of our military in Libya and in 2003 with Iraq as actions outside the confines of the Constitution. The ever-growing disconnect between the war-making powers of the Executive branch and the restrictive powers of the Legislative branch in our government is becoming more evident no matter which person or party hold the presidency. This alarming trend from unpopular conflicts like Vietnam, to our 2 skirmishes in raq, and now in Libya (and hopefully not Iran) goes to show us that the true change must come from our thoughts about what the proper role of the U.S. should be in the policing the world and how foreign policy should be conducted.
How much longer can we allow these warring executive powers to disregard the existence of our Congress in getting approval to use our armed forces and risk lives for the sake of political moves within other nations?
We managed to not conduct military actions against the Soviet union for nearly half a century despite their tyrannical government, efforts to massively build weapons of mass destruction, and engage in hostile actions against the U.S. Why can we not act with such poise and wisdom now with nations much smaller and less of a threat than the Soviet Union ever was to us?
The biggest problem is that we are asking the wrong questions of our runaway leaders. Too many When?s and Where?s instead of the more important How?s, If?s and Why?s?
