It's now been two days after the presidential election. It was a depressing night at American for those few Conservatives, but we have quite an election to look forward to in 2016. Honestly, I am much less angry about the President Obama being re-elected than I am about my senatorial candidate losing. I worked for 3 months on his campaign, travelled across Ohio seven times over, made around literally 6,000 phone calls, handed flyers out, prepared campaign videos, and all this with no profit.
Anyway, that is the extent of complaining i'll do. After all, Obama is our president and he deserves my respect as my leader. I am just going to go over some of the positives of the president's foreign policy. After all, it is always good to look from the opposite perspective. But more so, I just don't want to completely be a sore loser.
I think that the President has done a wonderful job within the realm of asymmetric warfare. Everyone knows about the Bin Laden raid. However there have been many more missions like it- often overlooked, the Taliban has been drastically weakening in Pakistan and Yemen due to American drone strikes. Furthermore, regarding the Libyan Revolution, I first criticized the intervention by NATO and our country's participation, but I believe that everything turning out surprisingly well. There were many news stories a month after the ousting of Gaddafi saying that Libyan approval rating of the U.S. rose significantly. I speculated that by Obama not "forcing" the revolution and/or overthrowing of a foreign leader, the Libyan people supported America more. Obama merely aided the revolution; he lent the Libyans a hand.
There's recently been talk about increasing spending on drones and possibly even making its own branch in the military. Do you believe this is the right thing to do then, in regards to the rather positive turn outs from our drone strikes so far? I believe so.
ReplyDeleteSure. I strongly believe a branch for asymmetric warfare is necessary in this period of irregular and specialized warfare. State on state action has been shown to be less and less in the past few decades while violence between non state actors and state actors is increasing. Therefore, a drastic change in the way military action is carried out (knowing that we are not fighting "formal armies"), which our president has slowly been manufacturing, is absolutely essential.
ReplyDelete