|
I see Obama as being a naive when it comes to foreign policy. While I believe that most Americans want to sit down and chat about things, this is not the case with many cultures, where posturing is as important as what is said. How many wars have had peace talks where it took longer to discuss the size and shape of the table than it did to actaully come to terms once there?
It isn't even an issue of talking with a leader. It's an issue of giving them legitimacy. Why do you suppose so many Middle Eastern countries refuse to even recognize Israel?
Even when we do sit down and talk, it doesn't mean a good outcome. Look at our current relationship with Russia. Putin and Bush get along personally, and theytalk, but Russia has immense opposition to the missile shield, and they are providing Iran with nuclear material and technology against what most of the world would seem to think is a good idea. It is straining relations no matter how much we talk about it.
This isn't just the Bush-Cheney approach - it is the approach of previous Presidents as well, and more common than uncommon. Would the Cuban Missile Crisis have played differently today? Why didn't Kennedy just talk to Castro and Kruschev instead of taking such a risky action? The examples are limitless. While I don't really like what I think Obama would do domestically, I truly fear his inexperience and direction in foreign policy, because he seems to think these leaders we "don't like" want to talk to us rationally with goals of compromise in mind. North Korea got their nukes in just that way with Clinton. These dictators are not to be trusted.
|