Foreign Policies

[ramenkage]

What is the best foreign policy?

[Zero]

I think the reason noone replied to is because no one has a clue what foreign policies are like. The topic is to broad. I don't even know what my own coutry's policies are... >.>
<.<

ON TOPIC:

Can you give some examples of Policies? I'm hoping you would atleast know some, since you're the topic creator.

[ramenkage]

examples of foreign policies
isolationism
imperialism
interventionalism

and most recently
bush/clinton doctrine

[narratorxx]

What is the best foreign policy?

best as in best for a country, or best for the world?

isolationism has been shown not to work already...china tried it and japan tried it and the euros screwed them over for it...china was "opened up" by the opium wars, and japan by "commodore perry" along with some other historical incidents (which totally escape right now)...america can't go to it cause it depends so much on the outside world to do business with...

imperialism--subjugating a people/country: morally wrong, bad for the world, sets a bad precedent, can be profitable for the country in charge, but can also be bad by causing a dependence on another country's resources/economy
<<but that was before like 1950, i'm pretty sure that imperialism doesn't exist in the pre-1950 form anymore...but a modern phenomenon resembles imperialism: i believe the term is globalism, which i'm not too sure, but i'm referring to transnational corporations who are big enough to have political swing

eg. there is bidding on a contract from nike. let's say two countries: burma and china are vying for it...burma has it already, because they said they could make the shoes for less money--cause they dont' have unions, no labor laws: no breaks, little pay, no benefits, etc...but china has decided to throw it's hat in to the ring. so there's a bidding war as to who can go lower, thus screwing over it's people more...china ends up winning cause it will make the people have to go with less, whatever that may be...everyone gets screwed except the US and nike...China wins the contract, but screws it's own people...Burma lost the contract, and the people don't get the wages, however little it is, and now Burma now has to find another way to better the economy...

interventionism--this is pretty much the US's policy right now, right? (the bush/clinton doctrine thing is throwing me off)...basically we police the world, whether it likes it or not...in many cases it's good, in many others it's bad...if we continue with this policy, we'd better, literally, choose our battles better...good: stopping genocide in africa (which we haven't done), bad: use your imagination...is it good for the country or for the world:again this can go either way...but it's getting late for me (been up and about for a while now) and i don't seem to be able to form coherent thoughts anymore...so i'll continue later...

[ramenkage]

bush/clinton doctrine is essentially the us will protect its liberty and freedom even if it has to do it on its own

i believe that it is necessary for the us to be the police seeing that the un is so useless. take the us from the un and you have spineless nations binding together to do nothing.