Tom's latest piece for GOOD

From their 'Why Vote?' issue

Look Out, World

Despite all the talk about our troubled economy, this year’s presidential race will still come down to competing visions of the post-9/11 world, and what America needs to do about it. George W. Bush leaves office stunningly unpopular, due overwhelmingly to his schizophrenic foreign policy (six years Hyde, two Jekyll). Given the strong political impetus for change, this election has always been the Democrats’ to lose.

Barack Obama will make America smarter about the outside world, and John McCain will make the world smarter about America. And on that score, there are plenty of ways to divvy up the global landscape. Here are ten criteria you can use to compare the candidates and help you break down the basic choices.



Priorities: Where’s the focus?

Allies: How to pick ’n’ save?

The vision thing: What to expect?

Heal the force: How to repair the U.S. military after Iraq?

Globalization: America’s new bogeyman, or its logical cause célèbre?

Climate change: The end of the world as we know it?

Iraq: When do we wrap up?

Afghanistan and Pakistan: How do we ramp up?

Iran: How far do we go?

The war on terror: Remember that?

Read on at GOOD Magazine.

Tom's notation:

I liked the 5k version better. I was promised 5k but got cut down to 4k. It happens.

I felt like I gave a balanced appreciation. I don't agree with a good portion of McCain's vision but I wanted to voice that disagreement without unduly polluting the analysis--thus the tie judgment.

Naturally, I might adjust the opening sentence a bit now! But as a foreign policy guy, I'm naturally going to make that argument.

Comments

[anand]

"The war on terror: Remember that?" :lol: :lol:

Unfortunately, there are likely to be many more large scale terrorist attacks on Europe, Russia, China, India, North America, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq in the coming years. Another 9/11 or larger attack on any of the great powers could have massive unpredictable consequences.

Takfiris, specifically AQ linked networks, now have significant bases inside Pakistan from which they are planning operations.

[Junk Science Skeptic]

Interesting you would say "John McCain’s candidacy has the consistency of comfort food," because that was my chief complaint about him as the GOP nominee, I had always said that the guy was "oatmeal" in the sense that it's difficult for him to excite followers in a positive way. If McCain wins, it will be more of a referendum against Obama and for Palin, than a validation of McCain himself.

While you sometimes wander a bit far to the Dem side, I generally agree with your take on globalization. Whoever wins the election should hire you as a foreign policy adviser.

Assuming for the moment that Obama really sticks with the advertised path, I'll give you the vision thing and the pick'n'save items, but I'd have to move the globalization item into the push column, perhaps leaning slightly toward McCain.

As a textbook libertarian (note the small "L"), I'm neither all liberal, nor all conservative. But as a thinker, I have just a bit too much concern about Obama's tendency to say whatever the audience of the moment wants to hear, and absent a track record as long as McCain's, it's impossible to know what Obama really thinks.

After 10 minutes of listening to you speak at an event, I know beyond almost all doubt that you "get it" on the globalization and military restructuring concepts. After 24 months of listening to Obama, the only thing I'm sure of about him is that he'd be a great hire for recording audiobooks.

Obama is definitely eloquent as all get out, but while that is a very important part of the package, it's not the only part. Your neighbor Fred Thompson is equally, if not more eloquent, certainly more believable as a leader given his typecast roles, and has as much political experience.

But neither Obama nor Thompson could keep up with you on foreign policy, or keep up with McCain's reputation for stepping across party lines to get things done. Once the honeymoon is over Obama will have to get support from the GOP, lead a government, and lead people. I just don't see any leadership experience/evidence/skills, and too much of what he has said is just too far left.

While the last 8 years haven't been nearly as bad as advertised, I'll grant you that some of the administration rhetoric has been too far right. Do we really need to make the same mistake in the opposite direction by going too far left, or can we learn from that experience and try a little moderate "oatmeal" in the form of McCain?

[Michael]

I wonder what the reaction would be if a President-Elect Obama offered the Secretary of Defense job to McCain (assuming that Gates can't be talked into staying)? From this article, it would potentially be the best of both worlds.

[Elmer Humes]

Very helpful summation for voters preparing to decide. Could there still be a "Truman" conclusion???With Great Powers coming in February I have been looking forward to your last minute post election perspective. Is half this article a prelude?

[Tom Barnett]

Elmer, the book is informed with such thinking, but it avoids being merely a primer for either administration (lots of those books out there, better written than I would have done). GP aims further downstream.