Locate and summarize an article on US foreign policy. Consider what you learned about the diplomatic policies of Roosevelt (Gunboat and Big Stick diplomacy) Taft (dollar diplomacy) and Wilson (moral diplomacy) In your opinion, which of these policies resembles the US' role in the intenational community today? Use specific examples from our classwork and the article to support your answer.Please post a link to the article.This is an optional assignment worth 10 points extra credit on our last or an upcoming exam.200 words, please.
if (document.body &&
typeof(document.body.unselectable) != 'undefined') {
document.body.unselectable = true;
}
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
"When nations close their markets and opportunity is hoarded by a privileged few, no amount-no amount-of development aid is ever enough. When nations respect their people, open markets, invest in better health and education, every dollar of aid, every dollar of trade revenue and domestic capital is used more effectively." - George Bush. With that said, the United States foriegn policy has drastically changed since 9/11. Donald K. Steinberg says in his article , " Hometown Diplomat: American Foreign Policy After 9/11", that America's foriegn policy was made heavily on America' saftey, well being and prosperity. The attack slightly erased the idea that America always has to be involved in other countries buisness , though, it is considered a superpower. In fact, about a month ago, I read an article in a political magazine called " The world's Worst Top Ten Presidents". And in the article, America was under every single country conducting trade with them in some way, even with North Korea, who was number one. I thaught to myself, why is Bush trading with horrible people. This article made it very clear. I guess, America trying to stay out of international conflict due to fear of another attack or lost of trade. America is trying to care for its people first. Hoever, we still have people living in poverty without food in America, so I guess it is not working. Somewhere, the money is getting lost. America feels that they have contributed to helping in other conflicts, such the civil wars in Central America and the new demorcartic governemnt in South Africa. However, She feels that conflict such as the one between Palestine and Isreal is beyond their reach. Now America is looking at more " transitional threats", such as HIV/AIDS and nuclear weapons. America's foriegn policy is believed to be summed up in my five bullets. First, is protecting American's life and granting them everything promised in the constitution , along with a free international trade market. Secondly, is to consolidate America's ties with her allies around the world( promoting international economy, a democracy, and coping with humanitarian disaster). Thirdly , to prevent the renewal of Great Power, which is sought of a communist idea. Fourth,is to turn more countries into a demorcratic free market. Lastly, is to stay informed in international conflicts. I would have to say Wilson's moral diplomacy resembles U.S's today. Only for the fact that after 9/11 the U.S has , thaught more of the actual people ( all around the word), while still trying to stay ahead in the economy. President Wilson introduced the Moral Policy in the western hemisphere. Especially throughout Latin America, Wilsom applied the moral policy to protect U.S territory while remaining on good terms with Latin American countries. Wilson thaught that Americans should be freindly towards all country because it has people. He decided that America will stay nuetral in World War 1. He was so friendly, that he even sent military groups to protects Hatian from Hatian rebels. Roosevelt and Taft were more into making money and steeling land , than caring about the people who were actually affected.
~ Dijah..Yo.
Shaun Quinto
Jeff Zeleny's untitled article from Time Magazine, reveals to the reader the US's foreign policy in Iraq today. As the article said, the US isn't at war with Iraq. We are at war with the Taliban, and any other terrorist groups there are out there. The people of Iraq are ready for change, and want to get rid of the terrorism, but don't have the resources to do so. So, the US intervened and is helping to chase terrorism out of the area. After 9/11, as the article states, the US feared another terrorists attack o nthe world. So, we sought to get rid of terrorism as a whole. This msot resemble's Teddy Roosevelt's idea of Big Stick Diplomacy. Similiar to the idea of the Roosevelt Corollary, Iraq has been taken over by terrorists groups. Since they cannot fend for themselves, the US must intervene. Just like Latin America was in the interests of America back then, the middle East and Iraq are our new interests. If they don't have the ability to fight off attacks we must take it in our interests to do so for them. Not just to have them as allies in the future, but we would be protecting ourselves and the rest of the wrold from terrorism. Once again, liek Roosevelt wanted we are becoming the Police of the World, not only the Western Hemisphere anymore.
I got this article from a magazine so i couldnt find a link or title for it.
Ama Kwakye
In the Article" The United States foreign policy" by Ezra Taft Benson from Idaho" Benson feels" Religion and Morality enjoins the conducts; and can it be that the good policy does not equally enjoin"?. Benson doesn’t really think that the United States foreign policy is good. President George Washington said the policy just "emphasizes fundamental principles" because he said all he has seen is just words! The policy is geared to help make the world safe for democracy. Honestly I believe the purpose of the policy is just to protect the liberty of the people of the United States. The only thing that I agree on with about this policy is one goal is the preservation of our independence; politically, economically, and "militarily" independence. All President Busch loves is his Military. President Washington feels the best way to preserve peace is to be always be prepared for war. Many Americans have yet to believe that America is that strong of as a country to defend other parts of the world. We as a whole need to get our selves together (The United States as a country). Senator Robert a Taft say’s our traditional foreign policy was best to avoid disputes with our nation and to maintain the liberty of our country without war. Out of Taft and Roosevelt’s policies, it seems to me that Roosevelt and President Busch would be good political leaders together, they both share some similarities. All President Busch really wants is his military. That was what kept us strong in the Iraqi war even though I am 100000% against the war.
During American imperialism from the 1890's to 1914, there were several diplomatic policies considered to develop a beneficial relationship between the U.S. and foreign nations. Theodore Roosevelt supported the Big Stick diplomacy, William Howard Taft supported the Dollar diplomacy, and Woodrow Wilson supported the Moral diplomacy. After the U.S.’s success after the Spanish-American War, Roosevelt relied on strong military use to achieve America’s goals. Though the Monroe Doctrine stated that the U.S. would not interfere with conflicts between other nations, the Roosevelt corollary updated the Monroe Doctrine and stated that the intervention was necessary within weaker nations with U.S. interest. Taft favored increasing investments in businesses and banks within foreign nations to acquire better foreign relations. Finally, Wilson sought to promote human rights, national integrity, and opportunity rather than imperialism. He favored a colonized war, where he only used the military to guide weaker nations away from foreign aggression. The U.S.’s role in the international community today is very similar to the diplomacy of President Theodore Roosevelt. In the article by Howard LaFranchi entitled “Despite Iraq discord, world eager for U.S. diplomacy”, it discusses the U.S. invasion in Iraq and America’s hunger for global leadership. As Shaun stated in his blog, within Iraq, the U.S. sacrificed many American soldiers to help the struggling nation break away from the Taliban. Even in Africa, the U.S. seeks to civilize and uplift the weak nation. “The proliferation of intranational ethnic conflicts, especially but not exclusively in Africa, which require a different kind of diplomatic intervention from international tensions.” However, I feel that the country should primarily base its foreign policies according to moral diplomacy because it’s most important to promote human rights rather than use force to assert influence in the world.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0320/p12s01-usmi.htm
Kadijat - 8 really thoughtful work but you need an MLA citation for the article
Shaun - 8 (for the full 10, what magazine/date/author)\
Ama- 8 - thoughtful work but you need an MLA citation for the article
Tiff- 10 great work!
Post a Comment