Why so little about foreign policy in the presidential debate?
today at 8:48 am
Maybe I dozed off during the presidential debate’s deep dive into foreign policy (highly unlikely during the nasty interruptions).
The nearly total absence of a discussion about some of the most important issues facing the United States was a serious disappointment for me. For me, the question is whether America will retreat behind literal and figurative walls–not unlike Americans are expected to cower behind their walls during the pandemic.
Or whether the United States will use its blessings of liberty to carry out John F. Kennedy’s resolve to extend them to the world’s oppressed and persecuted. Should America retreat into isolationism or should we use our vast resources, talents and energy for the good of mankind?
The issues are many, mainly the challenges posed by China in the Far East, whose actions there remind me of Japan’s violent extension of its hegemony throughout the western Pacific that sowed World War II. I was anxious to hear how Democrat candidate Joe Biden would respond to President Donald Trump’s successful peace efforts in the Middle East. And more.
I tend toward the neo-conservative view of America’s role in the world, an unpopular and ridiculed position these days. Trump is trying to straddle the two views by reducing America’s military presence throughout the world while challenging China’s dangerous appetite to extend its tyranny throughout Asia. I’ve got no idea in which direction Biden will go as president.
Maybe we’ll find out in the next debate. If there is one.
To subscribe to the Barbershop, type your email address in the box and click the “create subscription” button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.