Anyone elses thought of this?

[postin4Bern]

It seems to me that the title for the leader of this country is "President of the United States". It is NOT "President of the World".

Having said that: Why all the assaults on Bernie for not getting deep into international discussions?
Isn't it MORE important to focus on domestic issues for a President of the United States candidate?
Aren't there other job descriptions in government to focus on international affairs, such as Sec. of State, Ambassadors, etc.?

Maybe I'm off in left field here but I just thought of that after seeing yet ANOTHER article saying Bernie is "weak on international issues". Granted he needs to be AWAKE and AWARE of international issues but isn't the President of the UNITED STATES kind of like the CEO of the government running THIS COUNTRY?

I'm curious as to whether anyone else has had this thought or, maybe, I should see about some meds....

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. The President will have many well-informed advisors.

As long as he can avoid listening to war-hawks, he'll do much better than other Presidents have done, and avoid creating more hatred, more death, more destruction.

[polichick]

13. "well-informed advisors" and good judgement will serve him well...

Far better than military-industrial-complex donors who count on wars for profits.

[Funtatlaguy]

2. Because our corporate media loves War.

The only way repubs win elections is by promo tom endless fear.
The corporate overlord media complies.

[RKP5637]

6. Yep, that is really what is going on IMO. And this nation has been brainwashed into believing if we

don't have a bunch of wars going on for MIC profits, then we are in trouble.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

3. International issues are extremely important as they relate to the President of the US.

There is no more important or powerful human being alive other than whoever our President is.

This cant be overstated.

Having said that, I think Bernie has the ability to be good as a CIC and representative of our nation to the world.

And, having said that , I think Hillary is equally qualified if not more so, given her experience.

But to even remotely suggest that it isnt very very important, would be very inaccurate.

I realize this is a group for Bernie supporters only, and my comments are meant solely as observational and supportive of both candidates.

[MisterP]

9. Iraq, Honduras, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Pakistan experience DISqualify Clinton

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. Thank you, MisterP!

Sheesh! I love how they always like to sweep that under the rug and pretend she doesn't already have DISASTROUS foreign policy experience.

We'll remind them.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[RKP5637]

4. Yep, agree with you!!!! IMO the US spends far too much time screwing around in/with other

countries, and often IMO it's not all altruistic, often it's for profit. And often MIC profit! Meanwhile, our nation continues to fall apart in so many ways.

[sarge43]

5. Because it's the only thing Clinton has going for her when compared to Sanders

Her SoS experience. At least on the surface anyway.

[Bjornsdotter]

7. Other countries

...have a Foreign Prime Minister and we have a Secretary of State. We have them to handle the foreign matters with the President.

I have absolutely no worries regarding Bernie and Foreign Affairs. We already know how he votes regarding them and that he favors diplomacy. It works for me.

[MrChuck]

8. The President of the U.S. must have a strong grasp

of the role this country plays on the world stage.

Bernie Sanders is that man today.

When the United States matures as a worldly nation that bases governance in compassion for all people then we will, again, become the envy and have the respect of the world.

[Old Codger]

10. For me for now

I want my next president to be focused primarily on this countries needs irrespective of the rest of the world. It is all well and good to be a great neighbor but the need to be well at home before you can be a help to the others in my book comes first...

Meddling in foreign affairs to the extent that we have been in the recent past is not the best way to get this country back on its feet...

[dreamnightwind]

11. Bernie and I agree with you

Most of these foreign policy issues are the fallout of running an empire rather than running a country. Enough with the damn empire already! Mexico and Canada are not attacking us, and those who are attacking us are doing so as blowback to our troops' and drone's actions in their countries.

We destabiliized the Middle East with the Iraq wars, and the global corporatists and MIC are making a lot of bank off of the destabilization, while millions are dead or seeking refugee status fleeing the wars caused by the destabilization.

It's long past time that we called this out. We can't afford good domestic programs and infrastructure because we spend far more than any other nation on the MIC, which benefits the wealthy but not regular citizens.

Thanks for the OP.

[Plucketeer]

12. In spite of appearances

it's President of the United States of America - not "of the world". Since we're not an isolationist nation (ala N. Korea), we can't afford to ignore what goes on around the globe. It's imperative that we interact at the highest levels of our federal operations and the office of the president HAS TO have an active role in those doings. Imagine someone with Trump's approach - or Herman Cain's "Becky-beckystan stan" perception trying to be taken seriously by world leaders!

I wouldn't expect Sanders to know the warhead count of every nuke-bearing nation, but I'd count on him having a cabinet member who did.

[DaveT]

14. Bernie is fighting a whole platoon of dragons

and I do not fault him in any way for not going full tilt at Military Industrial Complex, too.

I believe that his thinking is based on the simple fact that very few Americans consider "foreign policy" to be a vote-changing issue. So, in these debates, the Corporate Employed moderators are honor-bound to aim a bunch of weighty foreign policy and national security questions at all the candidates. Bernie is not going to help himself by mixing it up with Hillary on these grounds. The average citizen has heard of "ISIS" -- probably -- but not one Democratic primary voter in 100 has a coherent idea about what America should do about "ISIS". And most will not even have an incoherent idea about it.

So Bernie more or less marks time during the foreign policy discussion, hitting his one big shot as often as he can -- The Iraq War really sucked, and I voted against it.

I think that is good strategy.




Away from the Theater of American Presidential Politics, out in the real world where bodies are ripped to shreds in the name of Shia vs. Sunni, Palestinian vs. Israeli, Kurd vs. Turk, Russia vs. NATO, ISIS vs The World and my old favorite reason to kill people, "American Credibility" -- there is no solution to anything, no "correct policy" to eliminate this or contain that or whatever smug bullshit that comes out of the mouths of people like Dick Cheney or Ann Coulter or Hillary Clinton. For 14 years we have been lurching around like Richard Nixon's "pitiful, helpless giant," unable to finish anything at all, as the trillions keep going up in smoke and the dead bodies and broken lives pile up in the hundreds of thousands.

The only way to understand the weighty intricacies of American Foreign Policy since September 11 is to pick up a copy of George Orwell's Nineteen Eight-Four.


Just as Hillary is playing bad politics by telling people what she considers the Bad News of GOP control of Congress, it would be fatally bad politics for Bernie to tell people the Real Bad News that all those wars are a crock of shit.


But they are a crock of shit, and President Sanders will have the same problems that Obama is having with his generals. No point picking that fight now.