As Bernie Sanders has risen in the polls, he has been taking increasing heat for some of his apparently vague foreign policy positions and the fact that his campaign does not have a team of establishment foreign policy advisers, unlike typical front-running candidates.
Bernie will approach foreign policy as he does economic policy--on behalf of his and your grandchildren. I'll take instinct over "experience" any day.
As important as foreign policy is, and it is very important, since the elimination of the draft, the public simply is not interested, in MHO. I think Bernie would make a serious mistake if he were to stray from the narrative that is bringing him success in this campaign. But Bernie, why not give Stephen Cohen a call on Russia and the disaster happening in Urkaine, or listen, if you have time, to Prof. Cohen's important discussions each Tuesday on the John Batchelor Show. I know Tuesdays are election days, have his program recorded and listen to it in the air between campaign stops. There are others of a nonestablishmentarian ilk out there, who, I'm sure would be willing to help. As for the polly wolly doodles who post endless screeds about Bernie's foreign policy positions, past and present, you are wasting your time, this election will have either Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton facing one of the Carnival Barkers. My judgment is that Bernie's judgment is the preferred judgment for the nation.
Since when is foreign policy experience a prerequisite for the presidency, anyway? How much foreign policy experience did Carter, Reagan, Bill Clinton, George Bush Jr., or Barack Obama have? Given that Hillary bent over backwards to accommodate the interests of the Pentagon/MIC/Deep State during her time as Secretary of State, all the more reason NOT to vote for her. If she wants to run on her foreign policy, she should go join the Republican debates where she belongs.
Three of the four of the presidents you cited were governors prior to being president...zero foreign policy experience. Obama had so little time in the US Senate that he was not much above zero.
Anybody who has been in Congress for decades like Sanders has been, gets nearly as much foreign policy experience than some body with Clinton's resume...Wal Mart board member, attorney, first lady, 8 years US Senator and 4 years Secretary of State.
As this piece correctly points-out, fresh thinking and advisers are far more preferable than demonstrated poor/deadly "experience" and entrenched or subversive advisers. The so-called foreign policy "experience" touted by Hillary Clinton represents influence not in America's best interests especially in ME affairs. The influence on US foreign policy and Secretary Clinton continue to represent the agendas of such interests, notably the international arms trade, for-profit war-machine, extremist Israeli Zionism and the corrupt Saudi regime - continuation of Obama's policies.
A major influence on US foreign policy has been, and continues to be, the pro-Israeli NeoCons, still an influential force in Washington including on the Obama Administration, Bill Clinton's Admn., and Hillary Clinton.
Our foreign policy in North Africa and the Middle East have been overtly slanted toward the extremist Israeli agenda of conflict and war to mask endless occupation, de facto annexation of Palestine, war crimes and local hegemony, especially regarding Iran - it is astonishing that the recent 6 nation "deal" ending sanctions, and hopefully, Iran's isolation and demonization, was accomplished, and I can only think it was pressure from the other nations involved that forced the compromise, along with the fact Iran, unlike Israel, never had any nuclear weapons program.
Hillary Clinton's foreign policy experience is not preferable to what Bernie Sanders might bring to the table - one demonstrated as dedicated to old servitude to war and conflict, and the other, hopefully, embracing a new paradigm - when a person has a demonstrated history it is likely they will bring that history and advisers with them to the Oval Office, not change their spots.
Well, HRC voted for the Iraq war and Bernie voted against it so I guess one could say that HRC definitely has more foreign policy experience....at making mistakes!
Let's stop using the term "mistake" when talking about Iraq. It was no mistake, but rather, a carefully executed plan. That continues today and will continue with the current crop of presidential candidates.
Jill Stein for President!
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
That's what I'm doing, too.
Point taken about Bernie's shortfalls. I just see them as overbalanced by his positives - not the least of which is that, for me, he is the only person in the entire field of candidates who doesn't evoke a visceral feeling of "That person is a slimy charlatan."
As for as a more humane foreign policy goes, he is surely, if nothing else, the most likely one of them all not to make things worse.
Thought Clinton had 5 years in the Senate before moving on to greener pastures as Secretary of State.
Doesn't much matter; experience is a distraction used to attack Sanders' qualifications. Perhaps she should go around stating, "The fact is, I'm more qualified than Sanders because I have more experience being a woman."
Are you on Shillary's payroll???
How small-minded, to equate principled leftist opposition to Sanders' rightist foreign policy with support for that murderous warsow.
Your hysterical additional question marks and exclamation points remind me so much of the online musings of Republican authoritarians. And teenagers.
Putting Lady Mcbeth in charge of foreign policy is nuts.
True, not a mistake, a carefully executed plan. Tell the parents of US soldiers killed in Iraq, that it was a mistake that their sons and daughters were maimed and murdered!
The man has been a Senator for decades. he may not have had the 'experience" of having a final say and then watching the world go up in flames, but he certainly is no stranger to foreign policy. BUT--as a somewhat conventional thinker, he probably will continue on a path of putting US national interests first. We are far from achieving global community frameworks. Let's start with some basic social justice.
You tell me. As long as capitalism reigns, and social justice is nothing more than a concept promoted by progressive groups, they will continue to be intertwined.
Hmmm...I have been a teacher for 20+ years. If the students reflect the socializing provided by their families and communities, I would have to disagree based on what I am hearing on a daily basis.
I think you are correct, and it is also filtered through economic class, regional and ethnic filters. The underlying message though remains the same: capitalism=democracy, individualism rules, US interests come first, take care of number 1 at all costs.
Clinton served only the first two years of her second six year term in the US Senate (for a total of 8 years) before being appointed Secretary of State.
That's where propaganda comes in, lol. And an educational system shaped to create conformity and complacency.