If Mr. Lavrov is right, thanks to Washington's indiscriminate use of sanctions against Russia, China and other nations could result in the end of the U.S. dollar hegemony.[1]Or is our foreign policy so awesome that the world admires the justice and cleverness of our approach? Really? Is the dollar's ceasing to be the world's reserve currency something that's a trivial matter to us? Our "experts" are apparently working overtime to make that happen.
New motto for the U.S. Department of State:"Filthy foreigners. Obey."
Notes
[1] "Washington's Duplicitous Approach to Russia and Crimea and It's Unintended Consequences." By Viable Opposition, 6/7/19.
4 comments:
I keep hearing and reading about continued sanctions against other countries and how it would end the U.S dollar hegemony and reserve status. What hasn't been told if that wouldn't be a good thing for us. I would think it would reduce our "foreign entanglements," reduce our overseas involvements and bring back our service men and closing of foreign bases. Maybe isolation and a protectionist stance might do this country some good.
I don't know that there is a 'master strategy' - nor, that one is needed.
This is a street fight with thugs. Sometimes, what ya' gotta do is knock down a few of the 'lead dogs', then posture to the rest - who will generally scatter.
Then, once the immediate threat is neutralized, is the time to strategize and plan.
But, first, get the gang dispersed and afraid.
Cederq, I agree. The "dollar as reserve currency" realities have given the US a degree of influence to which it is not entitled, though I was certainly ok with US power and influence during the Cold War.
Now our foreign meddling drives me bonkers. And it's not just meddling but doing hand-to-hand combat with the tar baby. 16+ years in Afghanistan and suddenly there's a segment of the population who are "ours" and to whom we now obliged given the danger they face from having thrown in with us. Look at all the Vietnamese who ended up in the U.S. I quite ok with that, especially since we abandoned them disgracefully when Congress cut off future funding for their war effort. They've been a decidedly positive addition to America but their presence illustrates some of the follow-on realities of foreign involvement.
And Bush's decision to embark on "nation building" in Iraq and Afghanistan was just madness. Our official arrogance knows no bounds.
Linda, it's the complete absence of any kind of combative, defensive aspect of our political leadership. Some beatings and minefields on the southern border would convey a message to millions of the futility of even setting out on the journey to the Land of the Big PX. Rather than teach responsible conduct to third-world foreigners our feeble leaders assume instant responsibility for any and all foreigners who set one foot on US soil as we bow down low to the twin concepts of "foreigner" and "kiddies."
Post a Comment