Do you think America goverment is overlooking domestic policy for Foreign Policy???

I do. It isn't just our government though. The American people & MEDIA are equally as guilty (myself included). It's not so much "foreign policy" either, it's Iraq.

In the past few weeks how many public figures have we seen talking about war with Iraq? How many news channels do we see focusing on "The Iraq Standoff" or some other catchy tag line?

We see the same "shocking" Enquireresque reports on Iraq over and over again. There's "Breaking News" everytime Hussein passes gas!

How much do we see about the development of our Homeland "Security" Dept? What's being done about immigration and why aren't we hearing more about the CIA, FBI, INS etc tracking down scumbags?

Pilots with guns and that's about it. Everything else is Iraq and oil prices.

This situation is a sad symptom of the fact that the public is pretty much unwilling to consider more than one big issue at a time.

Hi

I'm young, stupid and new so bare with me here. I believe that we could use some vast improvements in both foreign and domestic pocily, but I think that we are overlooking foreign for domestic. I'm doing a report on America's attitude to foreigners. It's no surprise that many foreigners (Europeans in particular) don't think we really care about them, thier policies, and our policies in regaurd to them. And for the most part we don't. There haven't been many outgoing gestures of genuine concern for foreign affairs as of late. For example, the St. Petersberg Times pointed out last year that the Associated Press compiled a list of America's top ten news topics and a list of foreign subscribers. The American list had two issues that even occured outside of the United States, while the foreign list contained consederably more issues concerning events beyond thier borders.

All of our attention now-a-days seems to be directed at places like Afghanistan (who attacked us on our home land) or Iraq (who not only have oil up the wazzu but would also love to attack us on our home land). One of the only foreign affairs where we seem to actually be reaching out to other countries (as far as I am aware) is the constant fighting between the Israeli and the Palastinians (not that we've done anything utterly miraculous there) If there are other really big things that our country has done for or concerning other countries, I obviously haven't been made very aware of them. So maybe, we are in fact paying too much attention to some forein things. Perhaps we are not paying enough attention to other foreign things.

Concerning Domestic policy, perhaps we do need do a little cleaning, but to know others better is to know a little of yourself better as well. So let's be careful with what we decide to discard and what we decide to concentrate on is what I'm saying, I suppose. Well, if you agree or disagree, then educate me. I'm open to info. Thanks for givin an ear.

Now there's an invitation. You don't sound that stupid to me, though. I don't know how young you are, but I'd say there aren't many in your age group (whetever it is) that would even rememebr an article that the St. Petersberg Yimes published a year ago. - never mind thinking that the content of that piece was in any way important.

Two points of information, though: Afghanistan did not attack us on our home land. A bunch of disaffected Saudis attacked us on our home land. All Afghanistan ever did was refuse to turn people over without any kind of evidence of their guilt or due process (as was their government's right by international law). The war in Afghanistan was created by the Bush Administration, not the Taliban. And there is no evidence whatsoever that Iraq would like to attack us on our home land or anywhere else. Again, the threat from Iraq has been entirely manufactured by the Bush Administration. Hussein is far more concerned about his immediate neighbors (as he should be) than the US - except to the extent that the Bush Administration is inciting him to defensive warfare.

I'd agree with Roy that it isn't foreign policy, it's Iraq (this week) which is being used to distract from domestic issues. But, unlike Turnea, I don't think it's the American public's inability to focus on more than one issue, it's that we're not allowed to focus on more than one issue - especially as the media now functions as a fourth branch of the government. An informed population can be very dangerous to autocrats and we will not be privy to the machinations of this government unless we are actively informed.

I think the media's focus on the war on terrorism is merely a symptom of the public's focus. I've got no evidence to back up any kind of conspiracy theory so I naturally start with the assumption that the news companies are trying to do what any company does, make money. They play to the public's focus to get higher ratings.

As for the other comments: It's no mystery that Iraq is openly hostile to the U.S. There is reason to believe that is they could hurt us seriously they'd do it. What you say about Afganistan is mostly correct, though it is true the country knowingly harbored terrorists camps, and if they were willing to show some efort to remove the terroists things would have gone a lot better for the Taliban. Civilian casualties are to be mourned but as for the Taliban government in general, darned small loss...

The fact that all of us are thinking about this must point to some other thoughts other than Foriegn Policy?

Only for us politically interested folk.

As a foreigner I am not really in any informed position to respond to internal policies but reading Sugarpoll's post and the replies prompted me to a reply.

As Wertz has already inferred, you may be young but certainly not stupid.

I can't speak for ALL those who live outside of America, however I can speak from an outsiders point of view, albeit appearing a little against the flow of the American public.

It was Winston Churchill who made the comment "Only dead fish go with the flow of the river".

There appears to be a general feeling of mistrust of American political motives towards the outside World and a wish that they would go home and let the World sort itself out.
America helped in the past as many other nations did WHEN ASKED.
True friendship.

Since the 'Balance of Power' became no more America is TELLING and demanding for financial or other reasons........this is not friendship this is tantamount to dictatorship.

The wish is that America goes home and does what America is best at........selling its way of life NOT forcing it.

Regards....Alan

I don't think that the government is overlooking domestic issues, but I do certainly feel that too much focus has been put on foreign policy issues.

Immediately after September 11th, Americans needed a war. It seemed to me that most people were ready to go that very afternoon.

Failure to act by the President would have proven to have been a severe political blunder. It would have sent the message to the country, the media, and the world that this President would not or could not act with force if America was attacked..

It didn't matter that we didn't have an "enemy"-- we had a war. We just needed the venue.

As far as policy moves go, it is much easier to deal with an issue thousands of miles away than right at home. Domestic policy change brings with it the same excessive media coverage as foreign policy moves. The exception is that America is detached from overseas events.

If President Bush were to shift his focus from the global scale back to domestic issues, and were he to actually attempt to make a difference, he would suffer immensly in the form of the ever-important approval rating.

If the President, or the Congress for that matter, really wanted to focus on domestic issues and homeland security, they would put a moratorium on immigration until we can come up with a better system. This would require treating any potential border crossers as hostile. This would be political suicide.

It is much easier to shuffle around the employees and say, "We're going to get that guy" than to actually repair the problems.

And just to clear up something that Wertz said:



The Iraqi military fires at our pilots nearly every day. What else would be required to be considered sufficient evidence?

The "threat from Iraq" stems from a breach of contract, UN Security Council Resolution 687, which the prior administration failed to enforce. This is certainly not manufactured by the Bush administration.

I feel like I'm rambling. I'll shut up now.

Mike