Constine/Xahar/Intermoderate Foreign Policy Debate

[The Mikado]

Good evening, (ladies and) gentlemen!  We are here tonight to see two of the brightest young minds on Atlas debate the major foreign policy crises of the world and the role America should play in them.

Before we begin policy questions, I'd like to ask both participants to have introductory statements explaining the basic principles that shape their foreign policy.

[King]

Question for Ben:  Did the UK exist before 1945?

[Sensei]

This debate is likely to have the same result as a fight between Mike Tyson circa 1989 and a puppy.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Can we get someone without absolutley awful foreign policy views to join?

[The Mikado]

Can we get someone without absolutley awful foreign policy views to join?

Would the participants be willing to accept a third challenger?

[King]

I nominate Admiral Stockdale.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Can we get someone without absolutley awful foreign policy views to join?

Would the participants be willing to accept a third challenger?

I'm fine with it.

[The Mikado]

Well, if Xahar's fine with it, the first person who volunteers before question 1 will be accepted.

Still waiting for opening statements.

[King]

I would volunteer, but I'm afraid DWTL would consider my foreign policy views horrible as well.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I would volunteer, but I'm afraid DWTL would consider my foreign policy views horrible as well.

Are a socialist lunatic or an ultra-zionist racist?  Because seriously if your not one of those it would be a step up.  I'll volunteer though if necessary

[Sensei]

Ah, man. I was looking forward to Xahar eviscerating Constine one on one.

[King]

I would volunteer, but I'm afraid DWTL would consider my foreign policy views horrible as well.

Are a socialist lunatic or an ultra-zionist racist?  Because seriously if your not one of those it would be a step up.  I'll volunteer though if necessary

No, but I'm on the left side of the spectrum.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Well so I am mostly on foreign policy, a right-libertarian but certainly not a neo-con.  I would honor for you to destroy these two loons

[The Mikado]

If Xahar's OK with it, Intermoderate will be our third participant.

[King]

If Xahar's OK with it, Intermoderate will be our third participant.

Ok.

I'll probably start out strong, lose interest and act like my hero Admiral Stockdale for the rest of the debate.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I'd like to thank The Mikado for moderating, and Xahar and Intermoderate for participating.

My foreign policy is shaped by a number of basic principles.  First is the belief that, because of its power and influence, both economically and militarily, the United States has a responsibility to play a major role in world affairs.  We should use this power to freedom, democracy, and human rights to other countries.  I believe in the Kennedy Doctrine that says, “We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”  To this end, I also support the United States remaining in military alliances such as NATO, and international organizations like the UN.

To get an idea as to my influences, look at Wilson, Truman, LBJ, and Scoop Jackson.

[Хahar 🤔]

Meh, I'd rather have DWDL.
Thank you to everyone, etc. etc.

I am a multilateralist. I support self-determination in all circumstances, and I am a proponent of democracy, to be achieved by peaceful means. I feel that being a superpower is neither a desirable goal nor a defensible goal, and that if one nation has a right, then all do. Most of all, I am an internationalist. I support world government, and until that goal is met, real international organizations, not tools of the status quo like the UN.

I do not blindly rely on another man's thoughts for ideological reinforcement, and I have not yet found anyone I agree with wholly.

[The Mikado]

I will interpret "Meh" as Xahar agreeing to Intermoderate's participation.

Once we have his statement we can begin in earnest.  Also, to prevent the thread's degeneration into an unreadable flame war right from the get go, Israel/Palestine will not be addressed until the third question.

[Хahar 🤔]

The opening statement can come later. Let's get to things.

EDIT: Never mind, Entrant #3 is posting in this thread.

[King]

Thank you Mikado, Xahar, Constine, and anybody bored enough to read this debate.  Sorry I'm behind everyone else here.  I wasn't sure if I was going to be in this thing or not so I'll have to improvise my opener.  I wrote this mainly in contrast of Xahar and Constine's openers


I believe a more intellectual, diplomatic approach in all foreign matters to be the key to progress.  I am not an advocate for a full-fledged "world government" as I believe that effective governing is built on meeting small, culture-specific needs.  Even in our own country, it is very difficult to pass a federal law that positively effects both the residents of Louisiana and the residents of Vermont.  As such, it would be nearly impossible for the United States and East Timor to follow a completely uniform policy doctrine. This is because in a hierarchy, regardless of size, the top of the pyramid always has the least understanding of the needs of the bottom.  This is why I believe worldwide government and worldwide laws and values and blind United States interventionism, while noble in theory, would only lead to more wars and struggle.  

[King]

The opening statement can come later. Let's get to things.

EDIT: Never mind, Entrant #3 is posting in this thread.

It appears our moderate is on a coffee break.

[Meeker]

It's kind of late on the East Coast...

[King]

It's kind of late on the East Coast...

Then, we will continue tomorrow.

Preferably at night as I work 9 to 5.

[The Mikado]

It's kind of late on the East Coast...

True, but I have time to ask question 1:

What should the role of NATO be in the Post-Cold War world, and what role should the United States play in that organization?

[King]

Ideally, NATO will evolve into the security force of the European Union, which will ideally expand its membership to include the entire continent, Western and Eastern.  As a result, I would like to see the United States have less of a controlling interest in the organization and become more focused on strengthening the United Nations and Organization of American States as NATO becomes mainly a European group although I support the US and Canada retaining its membership.

I also believe it's an absolute joke when we hear about NATO assisting the UN, the African Union, etc., etc., with missions in Darfur and other non-European conflicts.  Rather than having this Western military organization be a foundation of the world's fighting power, we should be giving the diplomatic intergovernmental unions more tools of their own.