Changes in foreign politics for the next president?

[boracay]

I believe one of the main goals in the foreign politics for the next president should be changing world opinion.
Do you share the same thoughts or do you believe America’s image in the world just doesn’t matter?
[ QUOTE ]

Some links:
Favorable opinions of the US have dropped enormously since 1999/2000.
The average of 18 countries thinking that US’ influence is mainly positive has dropped to 29% only in 2007.
69% of 26 countries believe US military presence in the Middle East provokes more conflicts than it prevents and only 17% believes US troops are stabilizing force.
In the area of advancing human rights the US is doing a bad job for 78% of Germans (compared to 24% in 1998) or 56% in Britain (compared to 22% in 1998).






Major BBC global poll (33 countries) shows only two countries having a mainly negative role in the world (Iran, US)






Most people believe Israel and Iran have a mainly negative influence in the world with almost as many saying the same about North Korea and the United States, according to another BBC World Service poll in 27 countries.



[/ QUOTE ]

[GoodCallYouWin]

I don't think the U.S. should make policy with the reaction of the world in mind, but effectively I endorse this because I endorse a dramatic change in foreign policy.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe one of the main goals in the foreign politics for the next president should be changing world opinion.
Do you share the same thoughts or do you believe America’s image in the world just doesn’t matter?
[ QUOTE ]

Some links:
Favorable opinions of the US have dropped enormously since 1999/2000.
The average of 18 countries thinking that US’ influence is mainly positive has dropped to 29% only in 2007.
69% of 26 countries believe US military presence in the Middle East provokes more conflicts than it prevents and only 17% believes US troops are stabilizing force.
In the area of advancing human rights the US is doing a bad job for 78% of Germans (compared to 24% in 1998) or 56% in Britain (compared to 22% in 1998).






Major BBC global poll (33 countries) shows only two countries having a mainly negative role in the world (Iran, US)






Most people believe Israel and Iran have a mainly negative influence in the world with almost as many saying the same about North Korea and the United States, according to another BBC World Service poll in 27 countries.



[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

What other people think should largely irrelevant. We should be doing things because its the right thing, not because certain people will like us if we do it.

[adios]

Maybe I missed something in these polls but they're really, really dumb. The questions to be answered is why; what is expected; and how reasonable are those expectations. They offer zero insight on what the course U.S. foreign policy should take.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe one of the main goals in the foreign politics for the next president should be changing world opinion.
Do you share the same thoughts or do you believe America’s image in the world just doesn’t matter?
[ QUOTE ]

Some links:
Favorable opinions of the US have dropped enormously since 1999/2000.
The average of 18 countries thinking that US’ influence is mainly positive has dropped to 29% only in 2007.
69% of 26 countries believe US military presence in the Middle East provokes more conflicts than it prevents and only 17% believes US troops are stabilizing force.
In the area of advancing human rights the US is doing a bad job for 78% of Germans (compared to 24% in 1998) or 56% in Britain (compared to 22% in 1998).






Major BBC global poll (33 countries) shows only two countries having a mainly negative role in the world (Iran, US)






Most people believe Israel and Iran have a mainly negative influence in the world with almost as many saying the same about North Korea and the United States, according to another BBC World Service poll in 27 countries.



[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

What other people think should largely irrelevant. We should be doing things because its the right thing, not because certain people will like us if we do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that what others think should not be one of our primary concerns.

I don't think "doing the right thing" is a sufficient guide, though, and may easily get us into trouble; I'd prefer to see us "doing the Constitutional thing".

Which Founding Father cautioned against the formation of entangling alliances with foreign powers?

If we were to try "doing the right thing" less often overseas, we'd end up "doing the wrong thing" far less often overseas too, in my opinion.

What Constitutional basis is there, if any, for overseas aid, or for things like nation-building or trying to stabilize foreign countries? I'm not aware of any such basis but that doesn't mean it may not exist.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe one of the main goals in the foreign politics for the next president should be changing world opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]


Maybe the policy should be to stop murdering and supporting murderers?

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
What other people think should largely irrelevant. We should be doing things because its the right thing, not because certain people will like us if we do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is exactly 100% backwards.

The only reason to have a foreign policy is when you want to interact with other countries economically, i.e. you want them to like you enough to transact with you.

Having a foreign policy that spreads your vision of "the right thing" is wrong because:

- I creates an asymmetrical view of morality where the "home" team's morality is always "right" and the "away" team's morality is always wrong, which cannot be logically consistent because it creates a paradox when applied from the other side's point of view.
- Most such foriegn policy amounts to kicking people in the teeth and thinking they'll like it, which is ultimately futile. That is to say, in addition to being morally objectionable it is ineffective.

[AzDesertRat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe one of the main goals in the foreign politics for the next president should be changing world opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]


Maybe the policy should be to stop murdering and supporting murderers?

[/ QUOTE ]

amen to that.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What other people think should largely irrelevant. We should be doing things because its the right thing, not because certain people will like us if we do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is exactly 100% backwards.

The only reason to have a foreign policy is when you want to interact with other countries economically, i.e. you want them to like you enough to transact with you.

Having a foreign policy that spreads your vision of "the right thing" is wrong because:

- I creates an asymmetrical view of morality where the "home" team's morality is always "right" and the "away" team's morality is always wrong, which cannot be logically consistent because it creates a paradox when applied from the other side's point of view.
- Most such foriegn policy amounts to kicking people in the teeth and thinking they'll like it, which is ultimately futile. That is to say, in addition to being morally objectionable it is ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect because you are assuming what "doing the right thing" is.

I should have mentioned that there is some value in having other countries like you. Being well liked generally a good thing as it will make others less likely to attack you, boycott your goods, etc...

I do not think that being well liked should be the goal, although it may be a nice side benefit. For example, if the Islamic world would like us better for practicing Sharia law, should we practice it? It will make us more liked by them.

You are always going to piss off someone. Taking sides one way or another is obvious that you will piss someone off. But even neutrality pisses off some people.

I could care less what France thinks of this country. If they think poorly about the US for good reasons, then the fact that there are good reasons to dislike our policy is the reason we should act, not because of a popularity contest.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe one of the main goals in the foreign politics for the next president should be changing world opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]


Maybe the policy should be to stop murdering and supporting murderers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Suppose you have a horrible dictator murdering millions of people. If you do nothing, people will be pissed. If you get a not-as-brutal group of thugs to take him out, people will be pissed off. The idea that you can make everyone happy through volunteerism is about as naive as it gets with idealism.