The pursuit of that deal has done extraordinary damage to our foreign policy in so many dimensions. I was about to say, "the worst foreign policy impulse we've had in this century," but the competition for that title is so fierce that on reflection, I decided it was probably only top three or four. Maybe five. Or six. Still.
Lastly I want to suggest the idea of Australia invading and overthrowing the govt of the Solomon Islands is a really really bad idea. In fact it is the worst idea I have ever heard suggested here at the Globalist and legal justification for doing so isn't a whole lot more different than Russia's justification for invading Ukraine. Such a move would almost certainly lead to sanctions against Australia by the EU and perhaps most if not all of Australia's allies(and quite possibly the United Nations itself). In terms of the standpoint of the US yes what is happening in the Solomons is bad for America but nearly as bad for America as it is for Australia and beyond some type of Anglo-Saxon ethno-nationalist kinship(which is btw quite strong here at the CG from the likes of Cmdr Salamander and others) the truth of the matter is that the lines of communication across the North Pacific and North Atlantic to the industrialized and heavily populated democracies of East Asia and Western Europe are far more important to the US than those between the US and Australia. In the whole scheme of things it might be more valuable to the US, Japan, and others to throw Australia under the bus if it attempted as stupid as a move as has been suggested here.
Lastly I want to suggest a lot of the sentiments being shared here come from one Shay Khatiri and I can't tell you how emphatically I disagree with Shay's military and foreign policy views(I consider Shay Khatiri one of the last old school neoconservatives). Maybe I am of the generation that remembers Commander "Strickland" from Top Gun and the Back to Future movies in the 1980s with a cigar stating emphatically "Do not fire until fired upon"
I interpreted the reporting on the crisis brewing in the Solomons as another ball dropped by the US State Department in pursuit of this bipartisan isolationist monomania, not an endorsement of an Australian invasion. Would we better informed if Vivek hadn’t reported on Australian concerns about Chinese infiltration of the Solomon Islands?
Why does no one talk about Macron's role in the Iran deal? The truth of the matter is the US has chosen to favor it's alliance with France and others over that of it's Middle Eastern allies. You can agree or disagree on the merits but you can't say there isn't a case to be made in the US that having an alliance with France is not more important than having one with Saudi Arabia.
**Ironically you could argue OPEC's refusal to increase production is having more economic impact in France than the US but no one in France not Zemmour, not MLP, not JLM opposes the Iran nuclear deal.
Because Macron’s support for the deal is irrelevant to the Biden Administration’s desire to reinstate what they consider the biggest Obama Administration accomplishment overturned by the Trump Administration? I don’t think cottoning to Macron is the reason that Blinken’s peeing in the Arabic and Israeli Wheaties.
Biden is re-instating the deal in part as Macron and others in Europe I think have made it clear they won't lift a finger to stop Iran by other means unless Biden rejoins the deal like it or not. As Claire often says this should be discussed in the French Presidential Election but won't be. Macron in particular already "rolled" the US' veto right at the UNSC under Trump when Trump to tried to snapback sanctions on Iran. It is Macron who isn't just peeing in the Arab and Israeli Wheaties but pooping in them along with all of the o French Presidential Candidates.
After a decade plus of alienating our Middle Eastern allies for a bum bomb deal, the chickens are coming home to roost.
The pursuit of that deal has done extraordinary damage to our foreign policy in so many dimensions. I was about to say, "the worst foreign policy impulse we've had in this century," but the competition for that title is so fierce that on reflection, I decided it was probably only top three or four. Maybe five. Or six. Still.
Lastly I want to suggest the idea of Australia invading and overthrowing the govt of the Solomon Islands is a really really bad idea. In fact it is the worst idea I have ever heard suggested here at the Globalist and legal justification for doing so isn't a whole lot more different than Russia's justification for invading Ukraine. Such a move would almost certainly lead to sanctions against Australia by the EU and perhaps most if not all of Australia's allies(and quite possibly the United Nations itself). In terms of the standpoint of the US yes what is happening in the Solomons is bad for America but nearly as bad for America as it is for Australia and beyond some type of Anglo-Saxon ethno-nationalist kinship(which is btw quite strong here at the CG from the likes of Cmdr Salamander and others) the truth of the matter is that the lines of communication across the North Pacific and North Atlantic to the industrialized and heavily populated democracies of East Asia and Western Europe are far more important to the US than those between the US and Australia. In the whole scheme of things it might be more valuable to the US, Japan, and others to throw Australia under the bus if it attempted as stupid as a move as has been suggested here.
Lastly I want to suggest a lot of the sentiments being shared here come from one Shay Khatiri and I can't tell you how emphatically I disagree with Shay's military and foreign policy views(I consider Shay Khatiri one of the last old school neoconservatives). Maybe I am of the generation that remembers Commander "Strickland" from Top Gun and the Back to Future movies in the 1980s with a cigar stating emphatically "Do not fire until fired upon"
I interpreted the reporting on the crisis brewing in the Solomons as another ball dropped by the US State Department in pursuit of this bipartisan isolationist monomania, not an endorsement of an Australian invasion. Would we better informed if Vivek hadn’t reported on Australian concerns about Chinese infiltration of the Solomon Islands?
Why does no one talk about Macron's role in the Iran deal? The truth of the matter is the US has chosen to favor it's alliance with France and others over that of it's Middle Eastern allies. You can agree or disagree on the merits but you can't say there isn't a case to be made in the US that having an alliance with France is not more important than having one with Saudi Arabia.
**Ironically you could argue OPEC's refusal to increase production is having more economic impact in France than the US but no one in France not Zemmour, not MLP, not JLM opposes the Iran nuclear deal.
Because Macron’s support for the deal is irrelevant to the Biden Administration’s desire to reinstate what they consider the biggest Obama Administration accomplishment overturned by the Trump Administration? I don’t think cottoning to Macron is the reason that Blinken’s peeing in the Arabic and Israeli Wheaties.
Biden is re-instating the deal in part as Macron and others in Europe I think have made it clear they won't lift a finger to stop Iran by other means unless Biden rejoins the deal like it or not. As Claire often says this should be discussed in the French Presidential Election but won't be. Macron in particular already "rolled" the US' veto right at the UNSC under Trump when Trump to tried to snapback sanctions on Iran. It is Macron who isn't just peeing in the Arab and Israeli Wheaties but pooping in them along with all of the o French Presidential Candidates.
https://www.france24.com/en/20200819-us-will-trigger-un-snapback-forcing-return-of-iran-sanctions-trump-says
And all due to a pathological impulse to suck up to our enemies.