![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Not sure why we have two monitors going at the front of the floor all day, but at least they're not tuned to Fox.
There are enough pundits to grind my gears about foreign policy, though.
1. No one like diplomacy. By definition in negotiation, no one gets everything they want and no one can tell anyone else what to do with any reasonable expectation of being obeyed.
2. No one likes sanctions because they take too long. South Africa, anybody? North Korea is still going strong, for values of strong that include starving people.
3. Drones are just an ugly (if liberal) or pussy (if conservative) way to fight a war, so no one likes them, either.
4. The military draft...whoa, WHAT? Yeah. The draft. No diplomacy, no sanctions and no remote control warfare = boots on the ground for our preferred method of prosecuting foreign policy: military intervention. The volunteer boots are pretty much all dead, maimed or PTSD'd into ineffectiveness for deployment.
Volunteers for military service are way down in the US. (How about that?)
That pretty much leaves isolationism (bit late for that, btw;) or a military draft, about which I hear nothing from our otherwise "all knowing" pundit sphere.
Something tells me that if the draft went on the table as a real option, people would like diplomacy/sanctions/remote warfare a whole lot better.
There are enough pundits to grind my gears about foreign policy, though.
1. No one like diplomacy. By definition in negotiation, no one gets everything they want and no one can tell anyone else what to do with any reasonable expectation of being obeyed.
2. No one likes sanctions because they take too long. South Africa, anybody? North Korea is still going strong, for values of strong that include starving people.
3. Drones are just an ugly (if liberal) or pussy (if conservative) way to fight a war, so no one likes them, either.
4. The military draft...whoa, WHAT? Yeah. The draft. No diplomacy, no sanctions and no remote control warfare = boots on the ground for our preferred method of prosecuting foreign policy: military intervention. The volunteer boots are pretty much all dead, maimed or PTSD'd into ineffectiveness for deployment.
Volunteers for military service are way down in the US. (How about that?)
That pretty much leaves isolationism (bit late for that, btw;) or a military draft, about which I hear nothing from our otherwise "all knowing" pundit sphere.
Something tells me that if the draft went on the table as a real option, people would like diplomacy/sanctions/remote warfare a whole lot better.
