User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Americans don’t want a more aggressive foreign policy

  1. #1
    Original Ranter
    Points: 858,837, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 92.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496507
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,624
    Points
    858,837
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,194
    Thanked 147,517x in 94,378 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Americans don’t want a more aggressive foreign policy

    Americans don’t want a more aggressive foreign policy

    American foreign policy has been dominated by neocons and liberal hawks for about 15 years. The American people are fed up with it.

    Q

    There is still not much support for a more activist foreign policy, and a plurality (41%) continues to say that the U.S. does too much around the world. This figure is significantly lower than it was three years ago before the ISIS panic, but even during the summer of 2014 it didn’t drop below 39%. Those saying the U.S. does “too little” haven’t been more than a third of respondents in any of the surv
    Read more at the link.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  2. #2
    Points: 172,886, Level: 98
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 764
    Overall activity: 47.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    donttread's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    88542
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    51,897
    Points
    172,886
    Level
    98
    Thanks Given
    18,283
    Thanked 20,510x in 14,774 Posts
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    Americans don’t want a more aggressive foreign policy

    American foreign policy has been dominated by neocons and liberal hawks for about 15 years. The American people are fed up with it.

    Q


    Read more at the link.
    What Americans want simply doesn't matter anymore

  3. #3
    Original Ranter
    Points: 858,837, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 92.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496507
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,624
    Points
    858,837
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,194
    Thanked 147,517x in 94,378 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Not true. If Americans were not tired of occupying the Middle East we would have a couple hundred thousand soldiers there today.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  4. #4
    Points: 39,654, Level: 48
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 496
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5662
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8,859
    Points
    39,654
    Level
    48
    Thanks Given
    2,515
    Thanked 2,140x in 1,616 Posts
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up

    Pakistan, Lebanon take American foreign aid while providing terrorists safe havens...

    Major US Aid Recipients Pakistan, Lebanon Among ‘Terrorist Safe Havens’ in State Dep’t Report
    July 20, 2017 – Countries identified as “terrorist safe havens” in the annual State Department terrorism report released Wednesday include major recipients of U.S. foreign assistance, including military aid. Pakistan and Lebanon stand out, since in both cases the report indicates that their governments’ approaches towards terrorism are part of the problem.
    Although several other key U.S. aid recipients, notably Iraq, Egypt and Afghanistan, are also listed as “safe havens,” in those cases government efforts battling terrorists are noted. Other “safe havens” include countries where large areas are ungoverned, such as Libya and Yemen. The State Department’s 2016 evaluation does not reflect well on Pakistan in particular, as the report reinforces long-held concerns that while Islamabad combats some terrorist groups it coddles others, allowing their leaders to address supporters and fundraise openly. Pakistan has long been among the biggest recipients of U.S. foreign assistance. In the FY 2017 budget request it was fifth-biggest recipient, behind Israel, Egypt, Afghanistan and Jordan. Since 2001 U.S. taxpayers have contributed more than $33 billion to Pakistan, either in direct aid or as reimbursements for counterterrorism efforts.


    An amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act authored by Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) and passed unanimously last week, requires the administration to certify that Pakistan is not providing military, financial, or logistical support to any terrorists operating in Pakistan or Afghanistan – a step Poe said “forces Pakistan to make a long overdue choice: either go after terrorists or lose millions of dollars of American aid.” The term “terrorist safe haven” in the report applies to “ungoverned, under-governed, or illgoverned physical areas where terrorists are able to organize, plan, raise funds, communicate, recruit, train, transit, and operate in relative security because of inadequate governance capacity, political will, or both.” The report states that “numerous terrorist groups” continued to operate from Pakistani territory in 2016, including the Haqqani Network (HQN), Lashkar e-Toiba (LeT), and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM). All three are U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs). HQN, a Taliban faction, is viewed as the most effective terrorist group in the region, and frequently targets U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan.



    Despite a $10 million U.S. reward offer, Lashkar e-Toiba founder Hafiz Mohammad Saeed moves freely in Pakistan. Here he is seen addressing a Ramadan iftar at an Islamabad hotel



    Among others, HQN is accused of a suicide bombing at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan in 2009, in which seven CIA employees were killed. A declassified Defense Intelligence Agency cable claimed that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency paid the terrorists to carry out the attack. The other two groups cited, LeT and JeM, were established in Pakistan in the 1980s and 90s and primarily target India. After being supposedly banned in 2002, LeT changed its name to Jamaat ud-Dawa (JuD). It is led by Hafiz Saeed, a U.N.-designated global terrorist, wanted by India for masterminding a terror attack in Mumbai in 2008, in which six Americans were among the 166 victims. The U.S. and India have been calling on the government to act against Saeed for almost a decade, and he is the subject of a $10 U.S. reward offer.


    Pakistani authorities’ approach towards LeT received particular attention in the new report. It said JuD and another LeT wing, Falah-i-Insaniat Foundation (FiF), were “able to openly engage in fundraising, including in the capital” and that Saeed “continued to address large rallies.” It acknowledged that Pakistan had, in February this year, proscribed Saeed under anti-terror legislation, “thus severely restricting his freedom of movement.” However, it said the government has not publicly reversed a 2015 declaration to the effect that neither JuD nor FiF is banned. Last January it place both “under observation” which while short of a ban does allow the government to scrutinize their activities. The report also said when Pakistan’s National Counterterrorism Authority late last year published a list of banned organizations it did not include JuD, but put it in a separate “under observation” section. The report did recognize that Pakistan has continued military operations against safe havens in the tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan, but added that “their impact on all terrorist groups was uneven.”


    Iran’s proxy thrives in Lebanon

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts