Comments on: Grrl Power: Thoughts on the New Faces of U.S. Foreign Policy http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/ "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.... let Facts be submitted to a candid world." Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:02:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Mike (PC) http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8081 Mike (PC) Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:25:16 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8081 The point is that Hillary is a realist hawk on the use of the military. Personally I like that, but I think it's also worth noting that she is closer to Rice in her philosophy than not. I'm convinced that Obama is in the realist camp as well, though it remains to be seen how that will translate to policy. The point is that Hillary is a realist hawk on the use of the military. Personally I like that, but I think it’s also worth noting that she is closer to Rice in her philosophy than not. I’m convinced that Obama is in the realist camp as well, though it remains to be seen how that will translate to policy.

]]> By: Jello http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8080 Jello Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:59:00 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8080 While it certainly is true that both republican and democratic administrations in the past were certainly no strangers to military intervention when it suited there means Clinton's military actions focused on limited engagement to effect pressure against an uncooperative regime with ideally minimal collateral damage. Bush's war was about tearing down Iraq's military and political infrastructure and rebuilding from the ground up. PC, you are intentionally ignoring the very obvious difference in scale and intent and implying that in placing Hillary as secretary of state Obama with be more predisposed to further military adventurism despite the fact that that is simply not possible with our current engagements. This is not the 90's when sending a few warplanes and troops somewhere for a few months was easy and cheap and Obama is not Bill Clinton, the man will make his own decisions. While it certainly is true that both republican and democratic administrations in the past were certainly no strangers to military intervention when it suited there means Clinton’s military actions focused on limited engagement to effect pressure against an uncooperative regime with ideally minimal collateral damage. Bush’s war was about tearing down Iraq’s military and political infrastructure and rebuilding from the ground up. PC, you are intentionally ignoring the very obvious difference in scale and intent and implying that in placing Hillary as secretary of state Obama with be more predisposed to further military adventurism despite the fact that that is simply not possible with our current engagements. This is not the 90′s when sending a few warplanes and troops somewhere for a few months was easy and cheap and Obama is not Bill Clinton, the man will make his own decisions.

]]> By: Mike (PC) http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8079 Mike (PC) Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:12:14 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8079 I'm not 'deflecting scrutiny'. Neocon foreign policy is well-documented. But I would also argue that liberals have pursued plenty of 'preventative wars' in the past. American intervention in the Balkans was rationalized at least partially on the possibility that it could spill over into Western Europe. I also recall a heavily protested air war over Iraq during the Clinton administration that was aimed at bending them to the will of the UN (and America). While it didn't have the cache of ground troops marching in, war is war. And even our humanitarian wars have lead to tragedy, least we remember Somalia? How do we know that Hillary won't be pushing for those kinds of things under Obama? I’m not ‘deflecting scrutiny’. Neocon foreign policy is well-documented. But I would also argue that liberals have pursued plenty of ‘preventative wars’ in the past. American intervention in the Balkans was rationalized at least partially on the possibility that it could spill over into Western Europe.

I also recall a heavily protested air war over Iraq during the Clinton administration that was aimed at bending them to the will of the UN (and America). While it didn’t have the cache of ground troops marching in, war is war.

And even our humanitarian wars have lead to tragedy, least we remember Somalia?

How do we know that Hillary won’t be pushing for those kinds of things under Obama?

]]> By: didionsmommy http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8078 didionsmommy Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:20:35 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8078 ha! p.c., thanks! ... i needed a good laugh! (it is true we haven't gone at each other in, gosh, weeks? i hope it's not age (!!!) that is mellowing us ...) *** i'm not discounting condoleeza rice at all. actually, i think she makes for quite a tragic figure. what i do not have any tolerance for is roundabout attempts to rationalize neocon policy or deflect scrutiny from the fact that the main tenet of necon phil.: preventive war. ha! p.c., thanks! … i needed a good laugh!

(it is true we haven’t gone at each other in, gosh, weeks? i hope it’s not age (!!!) that is mellowing us …)

***
i’m not discounting condoleeza rice at all. actually, i think she makes for quite a tragic figure. what i do not have any tolerance for is roundabout attempts to rationalize neocon policy or deflect scrutiny from the fact that the main tenet of necon phil.: preventive war.

]]> By: Mike (PC) http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8076 Mike (PC) Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:20:56 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8076 RA - That's not a fight. That's a polite disagreement. DM and I haven't called really thrown down in awhile. Mostly because she's a big chicken and fears my brilliance ;-) RA – That’s not a fight. That’s a polite disagreement. DM and I haven’t called really thrown down in awhile. Mostly because she’s a big chicken and fears my brilliance ;-)

]]> By: Mike (PC) http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8075 Mike (PC) Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:19:50 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8075 DM, your position seems to be that Rice, despite her brilliance, should be discounted because she is a neocon lapdog. I'm just raising the possibility that Clinton's devotion to her husband's interventionalist foreign policy may interfere with her ability to successfully pursue the goals of an Obama administration with notably different goals. DM, your position seems to be that Rice, despite her brilliance, should be discounted because she is a neocon lapdog. I’m just raising the possibility that Clinton’s devotion to her husband’s interventionalist foreign policy may interfere with her ability to successfully pursue the goals of an Obama administration with notably different goals.

]]> By: James F http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8077 James F Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:13:34 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8077 Actually, I get the impression that of anyone in the Bush administration, Secy. Rice is viewed most favorably by the American public. Secy. Gates also seems to have high positives, but relatively speaking he tends to blend into the background. Actually, I get the impression that of anyone in the Bush administration, Secy. Rice is viewed most favorably by the American public. Secy. Gates also seems to have high positives, but relatively speaking he tends to blend into the background.

]]> By: Radioactive afikomen http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8073 Radioactive afikomen Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:55:45 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8073 Is no longer possible for PC to appear on a page without a fight breaking out? I remember the conversations being more friendly before the last couple months of the election. Is no longer possible for PC to appear on a page without a fight breaking out? I remember the conversations being more friendly before the last couple months of the election.

]]> By: didionsmommy http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8074 didionsmommy Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:48:47 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8074 p.c. ... that is an amazingly disingenuous characterization of neocon foreign policy. feel free to provide evidence supporting the argument that interventionist policy and preventive-war strategy are analogous. ames, this is a good point about rice, but it is well documented that she is fiercely loyal to bush even to the point of seemingly contradicting her own positions. here is a quote i found from a rice paper in <i>foriegn affairs</i> (jan/feb 2000) ... rice is quoted by (susan) rice in a policy paper discussing bush's precedent-setting policy of using preventive war against "rogue states" ... "These [rogue] regimes are living on borrowed time, so there need be no sense of panic about them. Rather, the first line of defense should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence—if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration." rice, herself, was on board with deterrence (and diplomacy, for that matter), but the bush admin's neocon philosophy pushed prevention to center stage ... and the rest is history ... p.c. … that is an amazingly disingenuous characterization of neocon foreign policy. feel free to provide evidence supporting the argument that interventionist policy and preventive-war strategy are analogous.

ames, this is a good point about rice, but it is well documented that she is fiercely loyal to bush even to the point of seemingly contradicting her own positions.

here is a quote i found from a rice paper in foriegn affairs (jan/feb 2000) … rice is quoted by (susan) rice in a policy paper discussing bush’s precedent-setting policy of using preventive war against “rogue states” …

“These [rogue] regimes are living on borrowed time, so there need be no sense of panic about them. Rather, the first line of defense should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence—if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration.”

rice, herself, was on board with deterrence (and diplomacy, for that matter), but the bush admin’s neocon philosophy pushed prevention to center stage … and the rest is history …

]]> By: Ames http://acandidworld.com/2008/12/01/grrl-power-thoughts-on-the-new-faces-of-us-foreign-policy/#comment-8072 Ames Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:44:59 +0000 http://www.acandidworld.net/?p=3978#comment-8072 There's some question as to what role Condi ever had in the biggest, baddest Bush admin fiascos: she was cut out of the loop on most of them. I'll respect her as an intelligent, capable woman, whose talents were sadly overlooked by Bush. There’s some question as to what role Condi ever had in the biggest, baddest Bush admin fiascos: she was cut out of the loop on most of them. I’ll respect her as an intelligent, capable woman, whose talents were sadly overlooked by Bush.

]]>