When writing this weeks blog post, I found that I do have something common with Bachmann and that is foreign policy. Bachmann may stand conservative but her stance on international policy aligns with some liberal ideals. As a strong liberal myself, it's interesting to note how progressive some of Bachmann's beliefs are concerning international policy. Below are some of her thoughts:
1. No foreign aid to states sponsoring terrorist organizations
It's kind of like..DUH! Bachmann brings up Cuba as her primary example, stating: "We would never have flights between the United States and Cuba. It's a state sponsor of terror"(Issues2000) This dips into her beliefs about the Middle East, an area which has been attributed to terrorists since 9/11.
2.She supported the uprising of Iranian demonstrators against the Iranian government.
Bachmann's strong opposition to the country of Iran is evident in most of her beliefs. When talking about the removal of troops in Iraq by President Obama, Bachmann believes that Iran is standing by awaiting to "exert their dominance in this region"(Washington Post). Her vision of Iran as this country with such malicious views will play a huge role in her international policy if elected.
3. She believes in American exceptionalism...aka America is the most indispensable nation of the world. Saying she's a patriot is an understatement, however, her strong views of America as this country that should be leading the world could prove difficult if elected. It's problematic if she refuses to acknowledge other countries, like the UK or China, as leading forces in the global economy and global sphere overall because the US does not own the world. We are merely a small part of it and if her nationalism becomes overwhelming it could affect the US's relationship with other countries dramatically.
4. The removal of troops from Iraq is one of the dumbest things Obama has done (in her mind atleast). With President Obama's speech saying all troops would be out of Iraq within a certain period of time, many Republican's are calling the move foolish. Bachmann alike believes that the removal of troops will be detrimental to the country of Iraq since Iran is looking to take over once the US removes troops. Also, Bachmann goes on to mention how once we remove our troops we will have more troops stationed in Honduras which is interesting to think about. On top of that, in the past, when the US removes a dictator, leaving troops there, according to Bachmann, is the only way to ensure the country remains peaceful and running productively. If I could say one thing to Bachmann it would be that having troops has only caused the US to lose relationships with many countries in the Middle East and has resulted in an outrage of violence over the past 10 years. Removing the troops may be risky but it would allow the country to operate on its own...the US needs to stop babysitting and let Iraq begin to redevelop itself.
Generally, I find the notion of "American exceptionalism" to be extremely troubling coming from a prospective head of state, regardless of its espouser. I'm all for loving my country and recognizing its many assets, but if there's anything the Bush years taught us it should be that constantly asserting it does not make for sound foreign policy in the least.
ReplyDeleteAs with Bush, Bachmann takes those ideas and runs with them until they reach their most dangerous extents. To say that America is a great nation is one thing. To demand that others recognize it as the greatEST and structure one's political discourse accordingly, is simply stupid.
We can learn much from the governments of Canada, France, the entirety of Scandinavia, etc. And when I hear the phrase "American exceptionalism," what I feel I'm really hearing is a refusal to listen to other nations' ideas, even when they are so patently more competent than us in a particular area.
- Kevin Chafe
I guess the only place that I really disagree with you is the fact that Congresswoman Bachmann opposed military involvement in Libya. It seems like she is much more anti-liberal or, at the very least, anti-Obama. It seems everything the President says and does she disagrees with him. I'm not sure what your analysis says about that claim.
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure that I would say she has a liberal slant. I think it is very very conservative. The real question is whether she actually believes what she is saying or just playing the political angle.
I agree with Heath's comment that Bachmann appears to be determiend to disagree with President Obama more than a promoter of liberal polciies. I feel that Bachmann is extremely conervative in her beliefs and policies and that is her appeal to conservative republicans. To stray from her core beliefs might alienate some of her extreme conservative supporters.
ReplyDeleteI think Bachmann knows exactly what game she's playing on all levels of the political game. While she does have some foreign policy points that align with liberal politics, like the first two points you listed, I don't think that was by design, I think that's because she realized that no one would think otherwise. To support the Iranian government is very obviously insane, and to support terrorist organizations is insane, therefore she is not trying to compromise with liberals or pull independents but is still only appeasing her specific voting constituency.
ReplyDelete