The thought crossed my mind that what BushCo had in mind was the creation of a new cold war with the rising Islamic tide (with obvious domestic political advantages for the republicans). For awhile, he was largely successful with this policy domestically, but since no other countries were going along with it by 2003, it was ultimately a monumental waste of time, effort, money and tragically, of lives. A significant part of the US electorate still believes in this policy. This is expressed in both Clinton and Obama's official campaign policy positions, and it is the cornerstone of almost all (and there's lots) of the current literature out there on the direction of US foreign policy going forward.

I don't know what his foreign policy will turn out to be, just how far, if at all, he moves off center. I only know that almost the entire foreign policy community is out there calling for change, most everyone calling for beefed up diplomacy. Right now, if the US so chooses, Syria is approachable, Iran is approachable, and much work needs to be done in the new Europe, the Balkans, with Russia, Africa and in Latin America (for instance, Evo Morales just recently told US Drug Enforcement Administration personnel in Bolivia to pack their bags and get out).

Supposedly his campaign had some 300 foreign policy advisors, and I would've like to been a fly on the wall during their internal debates. No, I take that back. It would likely have left me mighty pissed off.


"It Can't Be Just About Us"
--Frank Schnittger, ETian Extraordinaire