|
|
The Republicans on Foreign Policy Outside of Iraq
listen:
  The war in Iraq has taken center stage on foreign policy talk by the candidates. But Turkey, China, North Korea, Afghanistan and especially Iran are foreign policy hotspots that could also gain prominence as the campaign progresses. In the first of a two-part series, we’ll find out what the Republican candidates are saying and how they're trying to differentiate themselves from not only the Democrats, but from their fellow Republican challengers. Guests
Web resources:
|
Support FromHighlightsNavigationUser login | |||||||||||||
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Hi Laura -
I think you kind of let one of your commentators get away with something this morning when you didn't challenge him on the assertion: "What's the point of having these weapons if you rule their use off the table?" And he said it as if that were US tradition and the conventional wisdom. That is an uncritical acceptance of a Bush "framing" on the issue that masks an immense change in policy: Our traditional stance has been that our nuclear arsenal exists for the purpose of deterrence. The free discussion of first use in a bombing raid is new and extremely reckless innovation of the Bush administration.
Add that to your reference to Republicans favoring a more "muscular" foreign policy. I know it's said commonly, but that too is Republican framing. It would more accurate in my view to say they project a more bellicose foreign policy – or if that's too obscure, try "warmongering" or "trigger-happy".
Dan Kinoy
(...of the Vermont Kinoys)