A Better Foreign Policy?

For John, BLUF:  It isn't like our foreign policy is going so well for us.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

I admit I ripped this off from someone else, someone who is pretty knowledgeable in the area of foreign affairs.  This person asks some interesting and challenging questions.

These comments are in response to an item in The Wall Street Journal, "Obama's Anti-Israel Tantrum".

It is intriguing to me how a SITTING President (for another four weeks or so):

• Stepping away from a Presidentially drawn red-line (one that the President drew himself);
• Making a rapprochement with an longstanding enemy of the United States whose leaders regularly call for "Death to America!"; and
• Breaking decades long precedent with regards to a longstanding US ally (albeit one without a formal treaty)

is seen as conducting a successful foreign policy that would see the United States stronger if sustained;

BUT

A President Elect who:

• CHALLENGES a nation who is rewriting the rules by challenging its red lines;
• TALKS about a rapprochement with a US adversary (who has arguably killed fewer Americans than the "Death to America!" folks have); and
• THREATENS to break decades long precedent with regards to longstanding US allies in campaigns (but who has walked much of that back since being elected)

should be considered a disloyal American.

I think that one thing I have noticed is that President Elect Trump has been like an ice breaker, opening up the lake of foreign policy so that those who have been frozen out feel free to offer up alternative ideas.

Just a thought.

Regards  —  Cliff