Book Delivery

Published on January 29 2007

diplomacy.jpg The book required for the next class arrived today. (I love you, Amazon! Book=$3 Shipping= $5!!!) There may be a very good reason I'm out of commision on the blog for awhile, lol. Yes, I'll also be reading. Reading the reviews last week, I knew this was going to be a big book, but.....900 pages? Mr. Kissinger may be a bit long-winded, eh? So far, some 50 pages in, it's pretty good reading. I'm on the chapter now about the difference between Theo. Roosevelt's style of foreign policy and that of Woodrow Wilson. Fun stuff! :-D Now, I just need to figure out how to apply these diplomatic and foreign policy principles to my personal life. [ /snark]

Written by admin

Published on #Pics and Babbling, #School

Repost0
To be informed of the latest articles, subscribe:
Comment on this post
K
I got this email and ran it past Snopes and it proved to be valid. The Snopes page on this has a lot more of Roosevelts speach that is very interesting and ironic given the current imigration problems in America. Its good reading.

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Reply
K
I liked the quote regarding Americans inability to sustain major "engagements that are not justified by thier moral faith". I have to laugh at that because I was listening to the Savage Nation this evening and he was discussing the fact that Jewish and Christian nations (ie Israel and the US) seem to have lost thier will to live. They can not endure any military action that lasts longer than a weekend without turning on themselves.
I think our nation as a whole has been convinced that we cannot be involved in any long term military campaign that involves American casualties. Even Israel who for the longest time was known for kicking #%$ and taking names when they went into action, has given in to world opinion regarding their own soveriegnty. When Hamas outright attacks them, they came back with both barrels blazing, until world opinion said that they were getting a little to agressive. Then they back off and basically accomplished nothing. The Radical Islamics don't view this as meciful compassion or politcal restraint, they view it as cowardis and weakness on the part of their enimies (us). Its a good thing out parents and grand parents generation did operate by this phylosophy. The reason we were victorious in WWII is because we were so unanimously united. Granted there were splinter groups that disagreed with our policies, but as a whole, we as a nation were united in what we were trying to accomplish. These days we are trying to go in 5 diffent directions at a time and its tearing the fabric of our country appart.
Reply
M
Agreed on nearly all points, lol. The point of the first chapter of this book is how that moral superiority and exceptionalism of Wilsonism has so completely affected all policy since. I liked this quote, which appeals to the realist in me:

"Wilson's historic achievement lies in his recognition that Americans cannot sustain major international engagements that are not justified by their moral faith.

His downfall was in treating the tragedies of history as aberrations, or as due to the shortsightedness and the evil of individual leaders, and in his rejection of any objective basis for peace other than the force of public opinion and the worldwide spread of democratic institutions."


You're right. The more things change.....etc.
Reply
K
"In my opinion", Wilsons' policy on neutrality led to the Germans achieving a strong foothold in Europe during WWI. Much of the country at that time did not want to get involved in what was going on in Europe but as often seems to happen, the longer some problems are ignored the worse they get.
Roosevelt on the otherhand was very agressive in his foriegn policy. His amending of the Monroe doctrine pretty much told he rest of the world the the United states was going to do what ever it wanted in Latin America. His policy of "speak softly but carry a big stick" says much about his expansionist views. However, he was an unusual mix of conservative expansionist but at the same time a progresive environmentalist who pretty much shaped our current national parks system today.
Ironically there can be some parallels drawn between Roosevelts foriegn policy and Wilsons foriegn policy and what is going on in the world today. Some things never change and we don't learn from history. We keep going over the same territory. The players change but the game is still the same. We don't like to get involved until the enemy is breathing down our neck and then we spend way to much time arguing amongst our selves instead of focusing our efforts on the real problem.
Ok, thats todays lesson in "History according to KB" 101
Reply