Input | Output |
---|---|
Link | Youtube |
Published | 2024/04/03 |
Theme | |
Status | article incomplete |
Beau says:
Biden faces a hero problem in foreign policy, as conventional wisdom falters amid humanitarian crises like Gaza.
Foreign policy watchers
Insights on the impact of public perception and political decisions on humanitarian crises.
#Biden #ForeignPolicy #HumanitarianCrises #Heroes #PoliticalLiability
Well, howdy there, internet people, it's Bo again.
So today we're going to talk about Biden.
And we're going to talk about Biden's hero problem,
because he has one.
And we're going to talk about foreign policy people,
and politics, and a dynamic that can normally
be counted upon, that probably can't be,
and how the conventional wisdom on something
is probably not right.
You know, when we talk about foreign policy, especially when things get hot, there are
certain little, they're not rules, but there are certain generally accepted ideas that
are true across conflicts all over the world.
One, you've heard on the channel a bunch, I'm sure all wars are popular for the first
90 days. Another that we've talked about is that wars need heroes. All wars need
heroes. It doesn't matter if you're talking about Alvin York or Audie Murphy
or grandmother who threw a jar at a drone. All wars need heroes. Because of
the divisive nature when it comes to American politics, because of the
divisive nature of what's going on in Gaza right now, you don't have combatant
heroes. Who's the hero? The helpers, right? The Mr. Rogers helpers, the
humanitarians, the people in there trying to help the civilians. That's kind of the
only group that people have been able to get behind, the majority of Americans.
What's the best known? World Central Kitchen. The group that was capable of
opening up that seaborne route faster than the US military. The group that was
getting aid into the areas that needed it most.
If you haven't seen the headlines, your hero just got killed, seven of them.
This is a bigger issue for the Biden administration than they may understand.
When it comes to foreign policy, people, there's kind of an elitist attitude towards it because
the way most of them view the average American, it's either they know what we know or they
don't care enough to know.
It's kind of the way it gets looked at a lot.
From a foreign policy standpoint, a Trump administration would be worse for the humanitarian
situation. There's no doubt about that. That's like a known item in the foreign
policy world. If you just want to look at his comments, I mean think about some
of the stuff that was said, finish the problem, certainly seemed to indicate
that the issue was not what was occurring but that the footage was
getting out. People that might be potential advisors talking about the
real estate value. A Trump administration would be worse for the humanitarian
situation. So the conventional wisdom is, well, people who care about this, they
wouldn't show up and vote for Trump. Lesser of two evils applies here. I mean
part of that's true. They may not show up and vote for Trump, but they also just
may not show up. And this is now out of the fringe left. This sentiment, it's
moving into the base that Biden has to have. At this point, the humanitarian
situation in Gaza is the biggest political liability for Biden. If he
doesn't get re-elected, it's going to be because of this.
The average American doesn't understand the larger issues. You hear it all the time.
Well all they have to do is this. I mean it's not really that simple. The average
American has no clue why the administration hasn't cut the aid. As
somebody who really understands foreign policy, I gotta say at this point I have
questions about the offensive aid. You know when you look at those laws
interfering with humanitarian aid is kind of a big deal when it comes to what
the U.S. can provide, I'm going to suggest that what occurred counts as
interfering. There's going to be more and more questions about this. The
conventional wisdom doesn't apply here. Your hero is gone and the lesser of two
evils thing is not going to apply. It is certainly not going to apply when famine
takes hold. And because of recent events, that just became a whole lot more likely,
right? Probably going to occur a whole lot faster. There are talks. Okay, they have to
produce results and they have to do it now. There are a whole bunch of
considerations here. At some point it needs to be acknowledged that a lot of
conventional wisdom doesn't apply. The normal stuff when it comes to conflicts
and politics, it doesn't apply here. For the foreign policy people who I imagine
might be watching this, you know that this is the most complicated situation
in all of foreign policy. You can't expect the political repercussions to be simple.
The voters may not behave the way you think they're going to.
Anyway, it's just a thought.
Y'all have a good day.
{{Shirt}}
{{EasterEgg}}