Constine/Xahar/Intermoderate Foreign Policy Debate (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 08, 2024, 02:15:57 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  Constine/Xahar/Intermoderate Foreign Policy Debate (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Constine/Xahar/Intermoderate Foreign Policy Debate  (Read 5027 times)
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« on: July 26, 2009, 06:21:59 PM »

Can we get someone without absolutley awful foreign policy views to join?

Would the participants be willing to accept a third challenger?

I'm fine with it.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2009, 07:54:37 PM »

I'd like to thank The Mikado for moderating, and Xahar and Intermoderate for participating.

My foreign policy is shaped by a number of basic principles.  First is the belief that, because of its power and influence, both economically and militarily, the United States has a responsibility to play a major role in world affairs.  We should use this power to freedom, democracy, and human rights to other countries.  I believe in the Kennedy Doctrine that says, “We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”  To this end, I also support the United States remaining in military alliances such as NATO, and international organizations like the UN.

To get an idea as to my influences, look at Wilson, Truman, LBJ, and Scoop Jackson.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2009, 09:29:34 PM »

For NATO, I don’t envision much of a change in overall purpose; NATO should still serve as a military arm of the United States and Europe.  Instead of fighting Communism, though, NATO should fight Islamo-Facism.  Islamo-Facism is an even greater threat to us in 2009 than Communism was in 1949, and NATO needs to be used to its fullest to combat its spread.

The United States’ role needs to be that of the leading force in NATO.  It should be the primary agenda setter; determining where NATO troops should be sent – Afghanistan, at this moment, perhaps Iran eventually, etc.  The United States also needs to pressure the European Nations to increase troop levels, as well as to expand.  I would not mind seeing NATO become a “League of Democracies”, so to speak, with every major democracy contributing troops, regardless of geographic location.

I’ll have an answer of Afghanistan tomorrow.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #3 on: August 05, 2009, 09:35:05 PM »

I'll take my time before answering this; meaning I'll let Xahar go first.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 10 queries.