Though there is part of me that thinks a weak US foreign policy might be better for the rest of the world than the attempt at an American Empire that's been ongoing for a while now. Mainly because American Interests(tm) tend to be very short term and profit-related and while they might do a lot of immediate good to the bottom line of their sponsors, in the medium and long term they are pretty toxic to the region they're employed in. The Middle East being one of the best object lessons here.
While I see your point, I think it may also turn out to be very bad. While the cat's away, the mice will play, and when America very publicly not only blinks but flinches, I think there are elements in the world that are going to have a field day.
True. Though I suspect they'll mostly be acting against local supporters of the American Empire than against the US itself. If I was either a local bully leader backed by the US or a local branch manager of KBR or Halliburton, I'd be worried as hell (and wearing a bulletproof vest!)
I hear you, and I don't think that's entirely a bad thing. The US has an unpleasant record of propping up nasty local thugs for the sake of political/financial expediency to the benefit of some wealthy corporate interest.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Though there is part of me that thinks a weak US foreign policy might be better for the rest of the world than the attempt at an American Empire that's been ongoing for a while now. Mainly because American Interests(tm) tend to be very short term and profit-related and while they might do a lot of immediate good to the bottom line of their sponsors, in the medium and long term they are pretty toxic to the region they're employed in. The Middle East being one of the best object lessons here.
no subject
no subject
bullyleader backed by the US or a local branch manager of KBR or Halliburton, I'd be worried as hell (and wearing a bulletproof vest!)no subject