Is America safer and more powerful than it was four or five years ago?

[Suburbia]

According to a recent March 23-25, 2014 Fox News poll, a majority of Americans say that America is not as strong and muscular in foreign affairs than it was four or five years ago. Is President Obama to blame, or is it "conservative misinformation"?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2014/03/26/fox-news-poll-voters-say-us-weaker-under-obama-terrorism-responsible-for/

[TNF]

Safer? Not at all. Obama has continued the global war of terror initiated by George W. Bush and embarked upon foreign policy ventures that have lead to mass killings of innocent people, which will create more terrorists committed to killing Americans. He has heightened tensions with Russia and threatened to provoke a second Cold War. He has made a 'pivot to Asia' and antagonized China. We are far, far, far less safe now than we were in 2009.

More powerful? No. The U.S. has been declining in relative power since it's peak in 1945, a trend that will continue until it is surpassed by another power, as has historically been the case.

[angus]

Is America safer and more powerful than it was four or five years ago?

yes.

As for the Fox News Poll, it's politically driven, and I have nothing to say for or against it except that you can word any question in a way that gives you the answer you want to hear.  

But specifically for your thread question, which I quoted, I'll say yes, and I'll also say that I am surprised, because ever since I was very young I thought we were going downhill.  I still think we're going downhill in most ways, but I have to admit that if you only look at the last five years, and if you only consider our national security, all the evidence suggests that we are safer.  For example, 2012 was the safest year for airlines since 1945.  FDIC now insures banks to deposits of 250K, which is 2.5 times more than it was five years ago.  Homicide rates are actually down in the really dangerous cities (Philadelphia, Detroit, DC) compared to 2009, and fatal terrorist attacks on US soil are down by about 30% since 2009.

But that's a bit like looking at the mean global temperature from the period beginning June 1991 and ending June 1993 and saying that the mean global surface temperature is cooling.  You can pick a short period and say that, for sure, but it doesn't imply that the mean global surface temperature is decreasing.  Similarly, taking a five-year sample of arrests, prosecutions, NSA reports, and other measures of security and saying that America is growing more powerful.  Sure, the trend is up if your window is short enough, but that's an unorthodox way of trying to analyze a serious trend which has long-term ramifications.  We are an empire in decline, despite the fact that there are occasional upticks in some specific measures.

[AggregateDemand]

no.

Can't blame Obama for lack of safety, but you can chide him for accomplishing very little with $7T in public debt. The US is still patting itself on the back for WWII. We need to modernize badly.

[bedstuy]

We're stronger by virtue of not being bogged down in Iraq, recovered from the recession and having eliminated a large percentage of the Al Qaeda leadership.

embarked upon foreign policy ventures that have lead to mass killings of innocent people, which will create more terrorists committed to killing Americans.

People like to say that, but where is the evidence?  Al Qaeda is an Islamist organization, not one simply committed to avenging the wrongs of US imperialism in the Middle East and Central Asia.  If killing civilians = terrorism, the US should have seen 100 times more terrorist attacks by Koreans and Vietnamese than Saudi Arabians.  I think there is some resentment of US military actions that can lead to terrorism, sure.  But, it certainly isn't as neat as you would have it.   

He has heightened tensions with Russia and threatened to provoke a second Cold War. He has made a 'pivot to Asia' and antagonized China. We are far, far, far less safe now than we were in 2009.

What has Obama actually done to heighten tensions with either country?  It seems like there is a rising tide of Nationalism and irredentism in Russia that can hardly be attributed to the President.  And, we're not about to use military force in either country, so how are we actually threatened?

[angus]

recovered from the recession

?!

We're more secure by many measures, so there's really no reason to make things up.

[bedstuy]

recovered from the recession

?!

We're more secure by many measures, so there's really no reason to make things up.

We have recovered from the recession since 2009. 

[angus]

Yes, I'm sure that we're all aware that by the Haav'd economists' measures, the "Great Recession" ended in June 2009.  Seriously, though, do you find it necessary to point that out in this thread.  First, since polling data inspired the thread, consider that about 2/3 of the public doesn't feel that the recession is over.  Second, consider that restaurants report about a 13% lower per-capita rate in sales for fourth-quarter 2013 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2008.  Third, consider the fact that the average house price in 2013 is about the same as it was in 2009, and actually about 1% lower than it was in 2008.  Most importantly, consider the fact that the national unemployment rate is about seven percent, which is about the same as it was exactly five years ago, and higher than it was in 2008.  

Sure, my stocks have rebounded.  I'm up from where I was five years ago, and the DJIA closed today just over 16 thousand, which is considerably higher than its close five years ago.  That's a leading indicator, no doubt, and it suggests that things are moving back to making films about Gay Robots finding a brain, while Poland and the rest of the world gets invaded.  Still:  Have you lost a job?  Been kicked out of your house?  Had to stand in a bread line?  No?  Neither have I, but let's not be insensitive to those who have, and who still do.  Just now, we are about six years into a ten-year recession.  I don't disagree that we are "more secure and more powerful" than we were five years ago as a nation--I still say that over the long term we are a crumbling empire and that this whole thread is an exercise in mental masturbation, but I was up front in my recognition that if you only look at five years and only look at security measures, we're up from five years ago--but don't tell me that we're back in black.  We are not.  Our unemployment rate is high, our national debt continues to rise, and our morale is low.  Those are not the hallmarks of long term sustainability.  

[bedstuy]

Yes, I'm sure that we're all aware that by the Haav'd economists' measures, the "Great Recession" ended in June 2009.  Seriously, though, do you find it necessary to point that out in this thread.  First, since polling data inspired the thread, consider that about 2/3 of the public doesn't feel that the recession is over.  Second, consider that restaurants report about a 13% lower per-capita rate in sales for fourth-quarter 2013 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2008.  Third, consider the fact that the average house price in 2013 is about the same as it was in 2009, and actually about 1% lower than it was in 2008.  Most importantly, consider the fact that the national unemployment rate is about seven percent, which is about the same as it was exactly five years ago, and higher than it was in 2008. 

Sure, my stocks have rebounded.  I'm up from where I was five years ago, and the DJIA closed today just over 16 thousand, which is considerably higher than its close five years ago.  That's a leading indicator, no doubt, and it suggests that things are moving back to making films about Gay Robots finding a brain, while Poland and the rest of the world gets invaded.  Still:  Have you lost a job?  Been kicked out of your house?  Had to stand in a bread line?  No?  Neither have I, but let's not be insensitive to those who have, and who still do.  Just now, we are about six years into a ten-year recession.  I don't disagree that we are "more secure and more powerful" than we were five years ago as a nation--I still say that over the long term we are a crumbling empire and that this whole thread is an exercise in mental masturbation, but I was up front in my recognition that if you only look at five years and only look at security measures, we're up from five years ago--but don't tell me that we're back in black.  We are not.  Our unemployment rate is high, our national debt continues to rise, and our morale is low.  Those are not the hallmarks of long term sustainability. 

That's true to an extent.  Our economy is certainly in a better place today and that was my only point.  The truly wrong idea is that Obama's national defense and foreign policy decisions are to blame.  This whole idea of foreign policy strength on the Republican side is basically a substance-free canard used for attack lines.  True strength isn't using our military power as much as we can.  True strength is enjoying the benefits of peace without compromising basic principles of international comity.

On the long-range trajectory point, I've never been one for jeremiads.  Regardless of the predictions of doom and gloom, we can do better if we make smart decisions so it's no use being fatalistic.  Fatalism is a self-destructive impulse.

[angus]

I appreciate your response.

I actually wasn't reading Obamania or Obamaphobia into this.  I just read it in the abstract:  are we more safe now?  Trends show that we are (strictly in terms of security and strictly over five years.)

Whether or not the American president is to blame or to credit is an open question.  I have been arguing on this forum for at least ten years that we give too much credit or blame to the president for most things.  We credit (or blame) him for everything from the cost of a loaf of bread to the severity of our latest orgasm.  It's really not fair.  Obama didn't cause this recession, and in my opinion neither did Bush.  And neither of them should be credited for its eventual recovery, which I contend is still in the making.

I agree about True Strength, so I won't comment on that.

As for my general tendency for long-term predictions of collapse, I always hope I am wrong, even as I post them.  I do think we're in a huge mess of our own making, and I think things will probably get worse before they get better, but I certainly think that it is possible that things will get better.  It will never get better if the only questions we ask are those that we ask on this forum.  Hopefully our politicians are asking each other more important questions than the ones they let us hear about on the national news.

[H. Ross Peron]

We're stronger by virtue of not being bogged down in Iraq, recovered from the recession and having eliminated a large percentage of the Al Qaeda leadership.

[AggregateDemand]

As for my general tendency for long-term predictions of collapse, I always hope I am wrong, even as I post them.  I do think we're in a huge mess of our own making

Federal deficit as a percentage of GDP is higher than real GDP growth. Housing, tuition, healthcare are still rising rapidly or holding at historic highs. The short term is obviously FUBAR.

If you understand that the long-run forecast is also grim, how could you possibly vote "yes"?

[angus]

As for my general tendency for long-term predictions of collapse, I always hope I am wrong, even as I post them.  I do think we're in a huge mess of our own making

Federal deficit as a percentage of GDP is higher than real GDP growth. Housing, tuition, healthcare are still rising rapidly or holding at historic highs. The short term is obviously FUBAR.

If you understand that the long-run forecast is also grim, how could you possibly vote "yes"?

It was grim five years ago as well, for starters.  Also, five years ago our armies were stretched beyond optimum capacity and military morale was exceedingly low.  Consumer confidence was lower than it is now, and so was the DJIA.  The unemployment rate was higher then than now.  The co-operation from NATO partners is a little better now.  Osama bin Laden is no longer hiding out making video tapes.  I just feel like our national security now is better than it was five years ago.  Not all of that is due to government policy, but much of it is.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Safer: yes. More powerful: no.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

No. We are still hated, but not because Obama is "weak" or any of that garbage. We are hated because we are still sticking our nose into international affairs unrelated to America.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The worldwide opinion of the US quite a bit higher now than in 2008.

[dead0man]

yes and yes

[Joshgreen]

1) Yes
2) No and that's a good

[ingemann]

I wouldn't call American unsafe before, so no to the first question, it's just as safe as USA have been for decades. As for stronger, USA have been in relative decline since 1945, so yes USA are weaker compared to the rest of the world today than before Obama, it just don't have a lot to do with him either way, short of a American president nuking Europe and China, the American decline will continue.

[Randy Bobandy]

Safer? No.

More powerful? Thankfully, that's also a no.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

It's hard to measure. In a shallow, short-term way, I'd say America is"institutionally" safer because Obama bolstered and strengthened many of Bush's national security and surveillance programs.

Then again, American debt could throw the United States into complete turmoil on all fronts if international powerbrokers turn to a new reserve currency. I think it's far off, but we're certainly closer to that scenario than we were five years ago. If the floor falls out from under the dollar, "safety" and "defense" will be the last thing on anybody's minds... unless we're talking about martial law, of course.

In terms of soft power, I'd also say that the United States is a bit weaker. Under Bush, there was no question where the US stood on the world stage. America had a clear raison d'être, and I think that clarity helped put a stopper on "international chaos." Would Putin have advanced into Crimea under the watch of an American president who's not a flake? Would the Arab spring have turned out so poorly? The US certainly wouldn't be pandering to Iran...

So I guess I'd put it like this (and it will sound so hackish, forgive me ): Where America is safer, it's largely thanks to Bush. Where we're weaker, it's largely thanks to Obama (but I'll give Bush a lot of credit for US debt).

[bedstuy]

In terms of soft power, I'd also say that the United States is a bit weaker. Under Bush, there was no question where the US stood on the world stage. America had a clear raison d'être, and I think that clarity helped put a stopper on "international chaos." Would Putin have advanced into Crimea under the watch of an American president who's not a flake? Would the Arab spring have turned out so poorly? The US certainly wouldn't be pandering to Iran...

So I guess I'd put it like this (and it will sound so hackish, forgive me ): Where America is safer, it's largely thanks to Bush. Where we're weaker, it's largely thanks to Obama (but I'll give Bush a lot of credit for US debt).

Good grief.  Putin invaded Georgia during the Bush administration and Bush emboldened Putin by his whole,"I looked into his eyes" comment.  On the Arab spring point, what's the alternative policy?  The US doesn't have a role to play in the internal politics of every Arab country all of the time.  Sometimes there's going to be turmoil and there's nothing we can do about it. 

Did you forget that Bush invaded Iraq and completely botched it?  Bush was a horrible commander-in-chief, one of the worst in history certainly. 

[Mordecai]

According to a recent March 23-25, 2014 Fox News poll, a majority of Americans say that America is not as strong and muscular in foreign affairs than it was four or five years ago. Is President Obama to blame, or is it "conservative misinformation"?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2014/03/26/fox-news-poll-voters-say-us-weaker-under-obama-terrorism-responsible-for/

It's an opinion poll, so it's basically worthless.

But yes, America is safer and more powerful than five years ago. If you believe the opposite then you are a fool, because you must then seriously believe America was safer and more powerful during the global financial crisis, which is nonsense regardless of which party you support. People forget so quickly.