A Libertarianish Foreign Policy?
A subject to be of debate in 2016
I say yes on the spot. Back during the Bush years, we thought we could try democratizing countries the way we did. Looking at Iraq 11 years after we invaded, that type of model has failed miserably. Not against supporting freedom movements like that what happened in Iran in 2009 (which Obama was silent on). But doing so by military force doesn’t work. I advise a different approach on that matter.
Afghanistan while it initially had good purpose, has turned into a disaster. Twelve years now??? That’s longer than WWI, WWII combined (which is only 4 years for US involvement) and Vietnam which was 10 years (got my own issues there which I’ll speak of at another time). Now with all that, Bush’s foreign policy runs out Obama’s by miles (don’t confuse his foreign policy for libertarianism). The world had more respect for us as a nation and dictators like Putin didn’t laugh at us.
I’m not against using military force period. Whenever we’re outright attacked like Pearl Harbor or 9/11, there’s merit to strike back at the enemy. I don’t necessarily adopt all libertarian merits of foreign policy, but I agree with the key principles. Don’t go galloping about in a country’s internal affairs unless there’s merit for US involvement.
Obama for as much as he denounced Iraq involvement, almost did the exact same thing with Syria last year (which thank God Congress listened to the American people’s objections). In fact, it would’ve been worse considering the people we were considering to alley with were Al Qaeda. I think the American people are more skeptical of going to war on the spot than they have been in a while.
Now what do I mean by libertarianish foreign policy? I mean one in which we the US kept ourselves more tamed down but still have strong influence in world affairs. Some have called libertarian foreign policy isolationism, but that’s not accurate. It’s non-interventionism. You want genuine isolationism, go to North Korea for that. Now I understand RedState readers are probably more hawkish than I am, but I do think there’s areas of which we agree on.
When it comes to the national security arena in particular, we’re all on the same page when it comes to wireless taping from the NSA. On that I’m very glad Rand Paul, Ken Cuccinelli and FreedomWorks have sued the Obama administration. Also another area to talk about is the military industrial complex which (not necessarily libertarian) Dwight Eisenhower warned about. It’s basically a form of crony capitalism. Businesses benefiting off of the state and making war profitable.
Now the military industrial complex and the military are two entirely different entities. The US military is still the one element of our government I still trust. It’s one of the few elements that government should be doing. Every other element and branch I’ve lost it completely. But do we need troops in some of the countries we have them? Particularly in a country like Germany where they’re perfectly capable of defending themselves. Now maybe in a high stakes case like the Korean Peninsula there’s need troops. But we need to be tamer on placing troops in other countries.
This should at least be considered for 2016 and probably will be with Rand Paul more than likely to run by this point. If you disagree that’s fine. I’m only trying to get the word is all. You can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org or twitter.com/jgcountry01. I also have a separate RedState account which I use for making comments. Thanks for listening.