Lot of press today about Obama telling folks he would actually have the gall to speak with 'rouge nations.' Folks within the foreign policy "establishment" are going bonkers over these ideas, and other members of the political class are calling this 'naive.'
Yeah, 'cause those "establishment" folks have been doing such a bang up job of things since 1989...
This is the kind of thing that only makes me want to cast my vote for the junior Senator from Illinois, even if he is a Mid-Westerner. Here's why:
The current policy of NON-ENGAGEMENT is an ABSOLUTE FAILURE.
Let us think about what nations these are, and how long our Not On Speaking Terms Diplomacy has been going on. Then, let us figure out how long these 'rouge nations' have been a thorn in our side:
North Korea: 1950/1950 - present. Cuba: 1961/1961 - present. Iran: 1979/1979 - present. Syria: not sure/not sure - present. Venezuela: we stopped talking to them after Chavez got elected, and then what happened? He got elected again, and relations deteriorated further - present.
Boy, that's one hell of a track record, ain't it.
Big talk from an "establishment" that considers the likes of China, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, those bulwarks of freedom and justice and humanitarianism, as nations 'worthy' of speaking to, or even "Most Favored Nation" status.
BUT EVEN THERE, in the case of China, they are better off for our policy of engagement than they would be otherwise. Even Nixon was smart enough to figure that out.
So yeah, "establishment," please keep telling me about how Senator Obama will not go along with your wise and flawlessly executed plans that have proven so beneficial to this nation and the world over the last decades...
...'cause that will make my vote FOR Senator Obama that much easier, even if he ain't from the South.