Have you, folks, noticed that when Obama’s constituency did not identify with or feel any interest in the Revolution of Dignity in Ukraine, the US did not get involved? And Budapest Agreements be damned?
But when Obama’s constituency did imagine an identification with and interest in the Arab Spring, the US did get involved militarily.
Of course, now nobody wants to accept responsibility for any of it. I guess it’s easier to believe that there is absolutely no connection between what voters want and where the US military goes.
But there is. Every single time.
Clarissa's Blog 
You’ll have to define this Obama’s constituency.
You seem to imply it is democratic party voters. I believe it is the DC foreign policy establishment comprising ‘thought leaders’, columnists at leading newspapers. powerful journalists, think tank people, and so on.
To suggest that Obama or any president looks to the proverbial man on the street for guidance on his foreign policy actions is laughable.
LikeLike
Of course, it’s voters. All the establishment does is service the voters. I’m sure that Trump doesn’t have anything against Mexicans or Muslims. But he’s got to give people what they want.
LikeLike
The one exception that proves the rule, right?
On the one hand you claim american voters couldn’t care less about foreign policy, and then you write Obama takes his orders on foreign policy from american voters. Pick one.
“Trump doesn’t have anything against Mexicans or Muslims”
Trump is not in government. He is not in a position to ‘give’ voters anything. If he becomes president and then engages in ethnic cleansing of mexicans from the US, and trade wars against China, we’ll talk.
Until then I’m going to assume that governmental priorities are not aligned with voter priorities. If that were the case, we’d have single payer and gun control (both policies overwhelmingly supported by the majority of this country), among other things.
Obama the candidate was completely aligned with the voter base, too. How much of that translated in practice when he became president?
LikeLike
There is no contradiction. People don’t care enough to get informed and proceed to express contradictory and overly emotional desires. The result is a foreign policy that is contradictory and inconsistent.
As for health insurance, voters have no idea what single payer entails. Vaguely wishing for something you can’t fully define will always lose out to passionate and informed conviction. How many people consciously support higher taxes and dramatically reduced choice that goes into every single payer Healthcare everywhere?
LikeLike
Arab Spring involves oil interest. If you ask most voters, they would probably think the term refers to a spa someplace. If Ukraine suddenly sprouts a huge oil field, government policy would change in a heartbeat. It has nothing to do with the voters. Bernie is trying to get voters actively involved, but most aren’t and don’t want to be. Hillary and Trump don’t require active thought. Hillary is avoiding making any statements that involve content (a proven strategy for race leaders) while Trump is saying anything that will get media attention — a “Glen Beck” strategy.
LikeLike
According to your logic, the US should have gotten involved in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ASAP because Russia is one of the world’s top producer of oil.
But the refrain “it’s all about the oil” is reductive and explains nothing.
“Bernie is trying to get voters actively involved, but most aren’t and don’t want to be. ”
In what?? His lack of interest and understanding of foreign affairs is notorious.
“Hillary and Trump don’t require active thought.”
No, but Hillary at least knows that other countries exist and what their leaders are called. Neither Bernie nor Trump do or care to find out.
LikeLike