What is the global strategy of the United States? What should the US role be in global affairs and the affairs of sovereign nations?

2017-04-10T21:22:49-04:00

The US seems to be suffering from a lack of clear direction it wants to go - and what role it wants to have - on the world stage. Are we there to enforce UN policy? Are we acting unilaterally against things that WE find immoral and unacceptable? Where do we draw the line on taking action or not taking action? These are questions that we should have solid answers on BEFORE taking action.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2017 9:45 PM

2017-04-10T21:45:28-04:00

Our government has just undergone a major shift from one "leaning" to another and it will take time to establish and maintain solid footing. The Nation is divided politically and ideologically as evidenced by the election. Although the control of two branches of government is held by one group we still are blessed with a Constitution that has served us well over the years. In the meantime we should just remain vigilant as responsible citizens and try to stay informed based on actual facts vice the spin that we are exposed to by the media. We all have a vested interest in the future of the USA, and especially so as members of the military that have contributed to our past and future security. It will take time for the new administration to become a functioning unit and in the meanwhile we need to stay informed and active in the overall effort. We may only have one vote, but collectively we represent the constant and stable backbone of the Nation. The level of involvement depends on us individually but as Veterans we should represent a sound and responsible element of society overall. There are processes and personnel in place within our branches of government to ensure we remain viable and the blueprint for democracy worldwide. We just need to be patient and confident that we remain on track toward the future success of the USA. IMO.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Apr 10 at 2017 10:06 PM

2017-04-10T22:06:37-04:00

Withdrawing from the world, surrenders any say the US may have about anything that are in its interest, security, or commerce.

Going with a coalition or allies reduces obstacles from the UN and the other permanent members of the Security Council. Acting within the spirit of the UN Charter, leveraging the organization, and preventing/reacting to atrocities is a legalistic approach to right and wrong and generally is justifiable except to the most stalwart adversaries (usual suspects who hate everything we do. NK, Hugo Chavez, etc)

Each situation is different. Each region has different strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. If we and like nations fail to enforce freedom of navigation and abandon the global commons, we allow others to control those spaces. Most of the world's commerce goes through two straits in the Pacific and the HOA. All haunted by Pirates. Shipping cost will sky rocket due to increased insurance and bonding costs. These increases will be from piracy payoffs, increased sail time avoiding pirates, escalating with armed security, or movement by other more expensive means. China desires to control the Pacific, unless we challenge their claims by customary law and freedom of navigation, we cede the Pacific and the shipping lanes, marine resources, and energy reserves to them.

There is not a line, it is fuzzy gray zone, most oftnly referred to as it depends.

Lawlessness and failed states cause all sovereign nations problems from crime and terror. They go camp out in God's little blind spot and do bad stuff. Eventually it finds its way into the US. We must have other nations retain sovereign control of their territory or we need to make them wish they would have. There is an element of what can we realistically get away with, including BOG.

We have to look at all this through the lense of ends, ways, and means. What is the value of the object(ive)? Are our national interests threatened? What things can we absolutely not live with? What can we tolerate? It is a constant evaluation of weighing cost vs benefit. It is gooey, sticky, and untidy. This is the wheelhouse of the NSA and NSC.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Apr 11 at 2017 9:25 AM

2017-04-11T09:25:33-04:00

Acting unilaterally...we've been doing that for years...only the names and political parties in charge have changed! But no, the United States should not be held back from action by vague policy questions. A president needs to review the information at hand and act when necessary and for the best interests of the nation.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2017 1:16 PM

2017-04-11T13:16:50-04:00

Were I to take a guess, I would say current policy is to "keep them guessing". This has been defined by alternatively conciliatory and blustery messaging from POTUS, and punctuated by actions on trade and Syria.
It appears to me the strategy is to contrast with the previous administration and bring other parties into dialogue where negotiations can take place.
I think it will be a while before that becomes comprehensive enough to call it a "Trump Doctrine".

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Apr 11 at 2017 3:01 PM

2017-04-11T15:01:02-04:00

In my humble opinion (who ever met a Marine who was humble?), our foreign policy and role should be based upon what is advantageous for the U S of A. Before anyone goes ballistic on me, I am not advocating isolationism. We tried that before WWII and look how that worked out. What I am advocating is basing our actions on the interests of our nation. The UN, and before that, the League of Nations, became so embroiled in politics that many of their decrees are designed to be advantageous to the majority of the members at the expense of the more developed nations. The New World Order is based upon those that have giving until those that don't have reach some sort of parity. The fact is, by more developed nations continually paying the lion's share of expenses of World Organization's goals (climate etc), they will soon deplete available capital and, if impoverished countries improve at all, all nations will assume the mean. The developed nations' will lower their levels to be more consistent with the less industrialized or developed due to the lack of means to maintain thier standards.
If we feel our standards are appropriate, then we should lead with those standards in mind. As one, if not the only, world power, we have a responsibility to provide support to those nations and people that subscribe to our standards and defend ourselves against threats to our culture. Would the result have been different if we had recognized the ultimate goals of Japan and involved ourselves in the Second Sino-Japanese War? Would the Third Reich have had the same impact on the world if Chamberlain and other world leaders, including Roosevelt, had seen the need to nip Hitler's plans in the bud?
Our President, no matter whom it might be, has certain prerogatives and powers which he or she may exercise unilaterally. If the president's actions are inconsistent with our standards as per the voice of our Congress, the president may go no further.
Our history is one of a giving and supportive culture. I am not saying we should not maintain that tradition, but there is no other nation or organization in the world who will work in our interests. We are the ones who have to do that.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2017 10:45 AM

2017-04-12T10:45:34-04:00

Yes this country is definitely suffering. The United States needs to reduce it's role as the world's police force. We send our people to fight and die for another nation's freedom, then that nation wants to be disrespectful and all of our sacrifices goes away in vain. America should only fight wars if their is a danger to America and it's people. We need to stop getting involved with every nation and their business that's how trouble is ensured. We need to stop all this regime changing and nation building and focus on American. We build nations up only to lose it later down the line just like Iraq. We participate in regime changing and then more chaos ensures. Look at Iraq, Libya, Yemen and other middle eastern countries. This country is also divided politically and ideology, then you have bias news channels and fear-mongering tearing this country apart even more.