Dick Lugar Speaks. 4/12/17

Posted on April 12, 2017 by markinaustin

As he was my favorite US Senator for most of his time in office [after Bentsen left the Senate] I am always interested in his views.

http://www.thelugarcenter.org/newsroom-events-107.html

Filed under: Foreign Policy |

« »

28 Responses

  1. markinaustin, on April 12, 2017 at 11:37 am said:

    I could have commented with a link, but because Brent is taking time off I posted it with a link [a new post is up].

    Does anyone know if Kev is OK?

    Like

    Reply
    • jnc4p, on April 12, 2017 at 11:41 am said:

      I haven’t heard anything either way.

      Like

      Reply
    • Kevin S. Willis, on April 12, 2017 at 12:34 pm said:

      I’m here. I just disappear from time to time, because stuff. Just very busy. And will be for awhile. Switching out Student Information Management Systems is like taking a running engine out of a moving car and replacing it with another running engine, with the idea everything will just keep working.

      That said, this bit: “Since World War II, the most essential factor in preventing conflict has been U.S. leadership.”

      I dunno. We cause a lot of conflicts. Our globalism is as much a war-starter as a conflict-preventer.

      “For decades, both Democrat and Republican presidents have embraced American global leadership. It is early in the Trump presidency. But the President and many of his aides have been outspoken in their skepticism or even disdain for continuing America’s global role.”

      Trump launched a bunch of missiles at an airport in Syria. Our role as global peace-bringer is secure.

      Like

      Reply
  2. jnc4p, on April 12, 2017 at 11:48 am said:

    Good piece by Julian Assange:

    “Julian Assange: WikiLeaks has the same mission as The Post and the Times
    By Julian Assange April 11 at 7:26 PM ”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/julian-assange-wikileaks-has-the-same-mission-as-the-post-and-the-times/2017/04/11/23f03dd8-1d4d-11e7-a0a7-8b2a45e3dc84_story.html

    Like

    Reply
    • Kevin S. Willis, on April 12, 2017 at 12:47 pm said:

      I’m disappointed. I thought he actually wanted to get facts and data out to the public.

      The Times is less than great.

      Although I’m surprise that they are so deeply in on the globalist agenda they are willing to shill for Trump. It’s an odd world we live in.

      The WaPo is just a mess.

      Like

      Reply
    • Kevin S. Willis, on April 12, 2017 at 12:50 pm said:

      “Much of Eisenhower’s speech could form part of the mission statement of WikiLeaks today. We publish truths regarding overreaches and abuses conducted in secret by the powerful.”

      Assange cannot seriously believe that this is what The NYT or WaPo regard as their mission. Not really.

      Like

      Reply
      • jnc4p, on April 13, 2017 at 8:33 am said:

        He’s saying that’s what they claim their mission to be. It’s the justification for why the press gets a special pass to protect sources, etc.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply
    • Michigoose, on April 13, 2017 at 12:09 pm said:

      “Good piece” and “Julian Assange” are pretty much the definition of oxymoron.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  3. Let the mutherfuker burn!, on April 12, 2017 at 12:51 pm said:

    I don’t understand this, is Lugar saying that without US defense spending there would be WWI/WWII level conflict every year since 1945? Cause unless I’m mistaken, literally 10’s of millions of people have died in conflicts since 1945.

    Since World War II, the most essential factor in preventing conflict has been U.S. leadership

    It’s hard now to see the concept of Pax Americana as anything but post facto justification for a perpetually growing defense budget.

    Having established this, what’s the evidence?

    but the overarching effect of America’s commitment to global order has been the growth of international norms and institutions that have checked conflict, promoted human rights, and expanded stability.

    Cause the dead from the Balkans and Eastern Bloc countries were unavailable for comment

    We see this most clearly in Europe, a continent wracked by deadly conflict for centuries.  With the benefit of a U.S.-led alliance and security guarantees, Europe has maintained peace in most corners of the continent for the last 70 years.

    Shows you how out of the mainstream I am, I welcome these positions and wonder why there is so much support for the status quo when there results are so poor.

    these include an off-the-cuff remark opening the possibility of rejecting the two-state formula for a resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, a needlessly contentious conversation with the Australian prime minister, and an unsuccessful attempt to pressure China by suggesting that the U.S. might rethink the one-China policy.

    Yeah, why would this dumb fuck want to implement what he campaigned on?

    So far, Trump foreign policy has been an outgrowth of the 2016 Trump political campaign, rather than a sober assessment of global conditions and U.S. interests. 

    I mean, that’s for the rubes, AmIRight?

    Let us experts handle it.

    We elect Administrations, not just to execute policies that have political momentum.  We also expect them to construct a strategic vision that attempts to integrate all levers of American power.   We expect them to play geopolitical offense, not just hunker down in a defensive posture.

    There’s more, this whole speech is just fascinating!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    • Kevin S. Willis, on April 12, 2017 at 1:00 pm said:

      Gotta say, I’m pretty much in agreement with McWing. I don’t see the evidence that we’ve done much to mitigate conflict in the world, except possibly through Mutually Assured Destruction with other superpowers. I see the rationale for a large nuclear arsenal, especially through the 80s. And I think the need is still present.

      Beyond that, I’m not sure how much we’ve accomplished. Also, NATO wasn’t about “keeping the peace”, it was about being prepared for war with an aggressive Soviet Union. It feels like it’s rewriting history.

      That said, I’d be happy to criticize Trump’s approach to foreign policy. Sounds like he got played by the neocons and tossed some missiles at random junk at an airport for … reasons. Sounds kind of like he might be letting the experts persuade him.

      I have a hard time believing those that advocate the globalist position really care about a two-state solution for Israel. I kinda suspect it’s just another lever toward to the goal of the New World Order (which they, the experts and elites, will naturally lead).

      A little disappointed in Richard Spencer objecting to the Syria bombing. It was an attack on non-white people, or at least their stuff. You think he’d be all for that.

      Like

      Reply
      • markinaustin, on April 13, 2017 at 7:33 am said:

        I don’t see the evidence that we’ve done much to mitigate conflict in the world, except possibly through Mutually Assured Destruction with other superpowers.

        Well, that’s the glass half empty view, and there is plenty of evidence for it. The historic missteps of American FP are well known to us – Iran in the early 50s, various South American manipulations, VietNam, the second Iraq War, Libya.

        OTOH, the nuclear non-proliferation efforts and the actual line drawing of the Cold War, e.g., in Europe and Korea; the various alliances, but especially NATO, and the use of foreign aid, trade, the building of leverage with potential allies, these have generally been good things, leading to the proliferation of more free and fair trade and a rise in living standards worldwide, and the spread of the idea of representative government to places that never had it before.

        So I get the big picture notion that building relationships with like minded folks and using all the tools for leveraging is a long term but constant challenge. The problems for America in the Middle East are related in part to having few prospects for allies or friends. Just how the hell America could walk into Syria and not get mired in a crossfire is a puzzle. In Iraq, America had or has one prospective long term friend, the Kurds, who are not religious fanatics and who are big fans of secular education, self determination, and free trade. Kurds happen to be at odds with everyone else in the region, of course. In Iran, the urban business class is desperate for western ideas, trade, and the eventual demise of the Ayatollahs. That takes long term cultivation, because the Ayatollahs have the Army, the Savak, and the Republican Guard with them, as well as the less educated fundamentalist minority [apparently a large and unified minority].

        I agree with Lugar’s notions of the long game.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply
  8. Let the mutherfuker burn!, on April 16, 2017 at 6:23 pm said:

    Uh…

    Like

    Reply
    • jnc4p, on April 17, 2017 at 10:17 am said:

      Again, no reason to defer to the judiciary once they dispense with the pretense of rulings being about anything other than politics.

      Also, since apparently Trump’s public statements can be used in consideration of his “intent” for his EO’s, this should be considered as well on appeal as evidence of a bad faith ruling by the judge.

      Like

      Reply

Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.