Self-interest is the prime directive if you will of any nation or government. Greed? That certainly has been the cause of a great many evils and actions. Establishing "Free trade" at the point of a gun would qualify and yes I have examples.
Why, yes, long past time.
Because it's stupid, harmful to our self-interests and to that of others as well.
That is what I will kindly call a mischaracterization of what I really said. Trump is bizarre and destructive and without parallel in our history. In terms of human rights in the ME, the Sauds specifically? Those beheadings and other punishments that have been going on? Where was (name the President of your choice) when that was going on. The Saudis have had a horrific record and we did damn near nothing. In this case it's a journalist come from America and the incredibly stupid Trump. We might have had some token sanctions in the past and certainly would have handled this with more theatrics AKA in this case, diplomacy, but we would not declare SA an enemy of human rights and act to drive them away in the past and this is where the truth lies regarding effective US policy. Trump is being reprehensible and greed rears its head as usual. THAT is where the difference lies in INDIVIDUAL PRESIDENTS, not FOREIGN POLICY as practiced by our nation.
"Trump is bizarre and destructive and without parallel in our history" doesn't go with, "but all past presidents have done the same thing." Even if by that you mean, only in relation to SA, then I'm afraid I still must disagree.
I've always been uncomfortable with us cozying up to these terrorist supporting theocrats out of naked self-interest. On that I agree. However, the other side to that is that we cannot take action in response to every human rights abuse in the world, or we'd be sanctioning or at war with every nation on the planet. Instead, we have to draw lines. Killing someone outside your own boundaries makes it more of an international concern. Killing someone in a diplomatic sanctuary makes it even more so. Killing a member of the press for criticizing your government makes it a concern of all democracies everywhere.
I don't buy the argument that one killing is the same as the next. They may be the same in terms of the tragedy to the individual and his or her family, but all killings are not equal in terms of their impact on democracy and human rights. That's why we should draw lines in certain places, like genocide, or killing a member of the press outside your own boundaries for criticizing your regime. Press freedom and, more broadly, the freedom to criticize one's own government, is as foundational to democracy as is free and fair elections.
We've done lots of bad things, but we don't kill members of the press for criticizing our government. Even Trump doesn't do that, much as I'm sure he wants to. I'm in favor of being self-critical. In fact, we
must be. But this is a situation where we need to take action to signal to the world that we will not tolerate this. This is where we can use our power for good. And yes, also for our self-interest. In this case, they happen to coincide.
We are killers and that where you seem to stick your head in the sand.
Are you joking? Where did I state or even remotely imply that I do not acknowledge past American misdeeds? I said the opposite, that we have a good and a bad side. You replied in disagreement, saying no, we're not multi-faceted. With only a tiny number of exceptions, you claim, we're just all bad. You're dead wrong about that.
Not only do we give foreign aid, both through public and private channels, but that isn't actually where we do the most good. Where we do the most good isn't quantifiable because it consists of deterring both the military aggression and human rights abuses of other nations. We can never know what a nation
didn't do because of American deterrence, which is precisely why people like you, and certain people on the far left, can play this game of counting every bad deed and stacking them up against every known good deed, then claiming we are a net negative force in the world.
I can only respond to that kind of sophistry with a historical counter-factual: what would the world be like if, in the wake of WWII, American did not exist, or was weak, or was isolationist? Would leaving the USSR as the sole superpower have made the world a better or worse place? I think it likely the world would be a much worse place, but then again, I can't prove a counter-factual. Then again, nor can you prove the opposite.
This issue of deterrence is, however, crucial. It's why Trump's behavior here is unacceptable. In 2010, we took a stand against the killing of journalists by passing the Magnitsky Act, not a "token" sanction as you laughably claim, but something which hits dictator's where it hurts the most: in the their wallets. Putin was so outraged by the fact that we've locked up 10's of billions in money he and his cronies have stolen from the Russian tax payer and hidden in the west that he appears to have made a deal with Trump to repeal that legislation in exchange for help in winning an election.
This is what we must apply to MBS here. It's what the law was explitly designed for.
That mom and apple pie image does not serve us well.
Wrong. Mom and apple pie is an essential ideal, and it's also
part of our reality. Just part. We can acknowledge the good and bad in America at the same time. We can be self-critical without abandoning our ideals.
Putin? Putin deserves condemnation because of the wrongs he does, not because he's Putin. So why say anything? Because there is room for improvement in how we view and act in the world. It is possible to do better because if we can't then Trump is who we deserve. You respond with "Well I beat people up but look at HIM"! No, HE is wrong and WE should have a look at ourselves, our inner monsters and strive to conquer them because that's a real value worth having. But the first step is understanding the beauty in the ugly truth, beauty because nothing good happens as a nation without understanding. We have moments when we as a people do try and that's where hope comes from. But I would not wave the flag to defend our honor, literally or metaphorically, to cover our sins. YMMV
Unlike the mindless patriotism of the right, mine has nothing to do with flags and anthems. It has to do with who we sometimes are and who we ideally want to be. It doesn't have to be a cover for our sins.
A reminder: this discussion started with me claiming America is both good and bad, and you disagreeing. Pro tip: when you take the one sided position that it's all one thing or another, you're probably going to lose the argument because you're likely going to be factually wrong. Reality is more complex than is dreamt of in your philosophy Horatio, and so is America.
Facebook
Twitter