Skip to main content

President Obama's foreign policy

Henry Kissinger.Image via Wikipedia
I miss the Nixon administration.


Yes, Nixon was a crook, no question about it. And I'm a conservative, and President Nixon definitely wasn't. (Disagree? We can debate that. He was clearly more liberal than his Democrat opponent Kennedy). But along with his sidekick Henry Kissinger, he had an encompassing, completely thought out, foreign policy.

Now, many conservatives didn't care for his policy - it was far too realpolitik for their convictions. And many if not most hated it, because it was a too confrontational to communism. I loved it then, and I love it more now. Look at successive administrations. Ford wasn't in long enough to matter. Carter was completely taken aback when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and never recovered his bearings. Regan made some steps in the right direction and had a brilliant plan vis a vis the Soviets, but couldn't develop a theory for the rest of the world. Bush the elder was on course, I believe, to a comprehensive world policy, but became a one-term President. Clinton may have been the most qualified domestic policy President ever, but seemed largely disinterested in foreign policy, and, let's face it, Madeline Albright was generally clueless. Bush the younger lacked his father's wide-ranging international experience (e.g. CIA, diplomat) and, tied up with terrorism, two wars and debt crisis, didn't really create a policy.

That brings us to the current administration. Even members of President Obama's own party can't explain, much less support, our _______ (whatever you want to call it) in Libya. And what on earth triggered the decision to sell some oil from the strategic reserve? While I don't think for a minute that Hillary Clinton is Henry Kissinger, I do think she is reasonably talented. While our 10 year string of financial profligacy has badly reduced our power and influence, surely we can do far better than this.

I miss the Nixon administration.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: What Matters Now by Gary Hamel

Interview of Eric Schmidt by Gary Hamel at the MLab dinner tonight. Google's Marissa Mayer and Hal Varian also joined the open dialog about Google's culture and management style, from chaos to arrogance. The video just went up on YouTube. It's quite entertaining. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Cover of The Future of Management My list of must-read business writers continues to expand.   Gary Hamel , however, author of What Matters Now , with the very long subtitle of How to Win in a World of Relentless Change, Ferocious Competition, and Unstoppable Innovation , has been on the list for quite some time.   Continuing his thesis on the need for a new approach to management introduced in his prior book The Future of Management , Hamel calls for a complete rethinking of how enterprises are run. Fundamental to his recommendation is that the practice of management is ossified in a command and control system that is now generations old and needs to be replaced with somethi...

Stimulus Plan

Mr. President: The House stimulus bill is awful. Dangerous. Counter-productive. It has a very high probability of making things worse!. Your man Rahm Emanuel is supposed to be a tough guy: turn him loose on the House Dems - they are selling you down the river. Some simple tests: the spending will improve long-term productivity; the spending will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and the spending will happen fast; very, very fast. There may need to be some legislation to enable spending without years of environmental review. For example, spending on wind farms would improve long-run productivity and reduce dependence on foreign oil. But let's say the wind farm is a couple of miles offshore. You can't have environmental groups stopping the development to see if some fish will be harmed. This spending has to happen now. And, no tax cuts with the possible exception of AMT. People aren't going to spend any tax savings; they are going to pay their credit card bills or r...

Romney/Thompson dream ticket?

The role of Fred Thompson in yesterday's SC primary is as murky as his next step. Did he divide the religious vote and thereby hand Huckabee a loss? Or would those votes, had he not been there, have gone elsewhere? My instinct is that more of those votes would have gone to Romney or McCain than to Huckabee. Fred comes across to me as the thinking person's conservative: thoughtful on positions, a sense of history, a Federalist, serious about the war on terror and prepared to take the long view on it. His addresses have content, not sound bites - which may, unfortunately, be a drawback in 2008. Mitt is quickly seizing the stage as the most knowledgeable in the field on economics, growth and job creation. With a war still consuming dozens of billions, it isn't clear that the race will be won on voters' views of candidates job creation prowess. However, he gives off as much energy as Fred seems to absorb - Mitt's electron shell could power Fred. So, Mitt may be drawi...