Introduction to Foreign Policy

The military of the United States is deployed in more than 150 countries around the world, with more than 369,000 of its 1,580,255 active-duty personnel serving outside the United States and its territories. The U.S. Government has over 700 foreign Military bases around the world. The United States Constitution ONLY authorizes a Navy and a standing Army for up to two years. The War Powers Act authorizes 60 days of undeclared "emergency" war.

"Any society that would give up a little Liberty, to gain a little security,
will deserve neither and lose both. " — Benjamin Franklin

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
— James Madison

"It is our TRUE POLICY to steer clear of permanent alliance
with any portion of the foreign world."
— General George Washington

"The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop."
— General George Washington

"If any person shall within the territory or jurisdiction of the United States begin or set on foot or provide or prepare the means for any military expedition or enterprise... against the territory or dominions of any foreign prince or state of whom the United States was at peace that person would be guilty of a misdemeanour" — Neutrality Act of 1794

"A standing army is destructive to domestic liberty, diverts limited resources away from wealth production, and encourages political leaders to make war carelessly. Once we adopt the foreign policy of the Founders, we will not need to maintain a standing army."
— 2012 Liberty Candidate

What would you consider "spread too thin"?

The military of the United States is deployed in more than 150 countries around the world, with more than 369,000 of its 1,580,255 active-duty personnel serving outside the United States and its territories. The U.S. Government has over 700 foreign Military bases around the world.

When you REALLY ARE the biggest and toughest kid on the block = you don't have to go around beating people up like a bully to prove it! In fact, that could inspire a gang of rebels to retallliate and attack you BACK IN RETURN (blowback)!

George Washington's Foreign POLICY

GW's Farewell Address to the People of the United States:
"It is our TRUE POLICY to steer clear of permanent alliance
with any portion of the foreign world."
— GEORGE WASHINGTON

Proclamation of Neutrality

The Proclamation of Neutrality was a formal announcement issued by United States President George Washington on April 22, 1793, declaring the nation neutral in the conflict between France and Great Britain. It threatened legal proceedings against any American providing assistance to warring countries. The Proclamation led to the Neutrality Act of 1794.

The Neutrality Act of 1794 made it illegal for an American to wage war against any country at peace with the United States. The Neutrality Act of 1794 declared in part:

"If any person shall within the territory or jurisdiction of the United States begin or set on foot or provide or prepare the means for any military expedition or enterprise...against the territory or dominions of any foreign prince or state of whom the United States was at peace that person would be guilty of a misdemeanour"

The act also forbade foreign war vessels to outfit in American waters and set a three mile territorial limit at sea. The act was amended several times and remains in force.

Proclamation of Neutrality: Pacificus-Helvidius debates

The proclamation started a war of pamphlets between Hamilton (writing for the Federalists), and Madison (writing for the Jeffersonian/Republicans). In his seven essays, written under the nom de plume "Pacificus", Hamilton dealt with objections to the proclamation. Among these were:

The decree was, in fact, constitutional; for while Congress has the sole right to declare war, it is "the duty of the executive to preserve peace till war is declared."

The Neutrality Proclamation did not violate the United States' defensive alliance with France, as the Jeffersonians were claiming. The treaty, Hamilton pointed out, was a defensive alliance and did not apply to offensive wars, "and it was France that had declared war upon other European powers", not the other way around.

By siding with France the United States would have left itself open to attacks within American borders by the governments of Britain and Spain stirring up "numerous Indian tribes" influenced by these two governments.

Jefferson, (having read several of the "Pacificus" essays) encouraged James Madison to reply. Madison was initially hesitant. From his Virginia plantation he offered Jefferson excuses as to why he could not write a reply, including that he didn't have the necessary books and papers to refute "Pacificus", that the summer heat was "oppressive", and that he had many houseguests who were wearing out their welcome.[5] Ultimately Madison agreed to Jefferson's request, though afterwards he wrote to him, "I have forced myself in to the task of a reply. I can truly say I find it the most grating one I have ever experienced."

Writing under the name "Helvidius", Madison's five essays showed the animosity that had evolved with the two political factions. He attacked Federalists, and Hamilton in particular, and anyone who supported the Neutrality Proclamation as secret monarchists, declaring: "Several features with the signature of Pacificus were [as of] late published, which have been read with singular pleasure and applause by the foreigners and degenerate citizens among us, who hate our republican government and the French Revolution."

Madison brought to light the strict constructionist's view of both the Constitution and the Proclamation, demanding that Congress, NOT the president, had full authority over all foreign affairs except those areas specified in the Constitution.

Foreign Policy: Non-interventionism

U.S. Constitution Policy is STRICT "non-interventionalism", ONLY Navy with Air Force, Navy Intel, NO Standing Army (2 years max), NO CIA, NO Pentagon, NO foreign war budget under the guise of "homeland security", NO foreign base budget, NO membership with the UN / EU / NAU, NO Homeland Security, NO spying on Americans (repeal U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act), NO assassinating Americans without a fair and public trial, NO subsidized military contractors, NO subsidized GMO exports... i could go on and on and on... but what most peoplerefer to as U.S. policy, is actually the policy of infiltrating traitors "working AGAINST the best interests of the United States" - NOT the United States Constitution, but rather a bastardization of the Constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interventionism_(politics)

Isolationism vs. Non-interventionism

Ron Paul Slams NeoCON Warmonger *POLICY*

The candidates who have laughed at Ron Paul's FOREIGN POLICY positions, should be ashamed of themselves. These are the same FOREIGN POLICY positions of the Founding Fathers.

From George Washington's Farewell Address:

"Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct. And can it be that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period a great nation to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that in the course of time and things the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantage which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which enobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.

So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrles and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop."

Liberty Candidates 2012 - Foreign Policy

1. What is your opinion on current US foreign policy?

Our current foreign policy - endless interventions, wars and occupations abroad - makes the American people more vulnerable to future terrorist attacks, and is bankrupting our nation.

2. How should we fight a "War on Terror"?

A war on a tactic is a nonsensical and dangerous notion, and one that has led us into an open-ended conflict with no achievable goal.

3. Should the U.S. occupy other countries?
If not, would you push to close all bases?
Are there any you would keep open?

The United States should draw down its overseas military presence. U.S. occupation forces only incite hatred against Americans, and sow the seeds for future conflicts.

4. Should the U.S. maintain its "Standing Army"?

A standing army is destructive to domestic liberty, diverts limited resources away from wealth production, and encourages political leaders to make war carelessly. Once we adopt the foreign policy of the Founders, we will not need to maintain a standing army.

5. Is the "P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act" necessary to protect America?
If not, would you vote to repeal it?

The Patriot Act eviscerated our 4th-amendment privacy protections,
is unconstitutional and should be repealed.

War Policy vs. "DEFENSE Spending"

Genocide & zionism are NOT "US Policy"... those are Rothschild policy; he's a war contractor, slash international banker, slash war-time lender. Obama is currently following UNITED NATIONS policy in Libya. Obama follows Zbigniew Brzezinski policy in Afghanistan, and PNAC policy in Iraq. As far as i know, the only actual American involved in that policy is Donald Rumsfeld (traitor from Monsanto), and i'm not going to count treasonous David Rockefeller as an American anymore either... Rockefeller refers to himself as an "internationalist" and he intends to USURP the SOVEREIGNTY of the United States into the UN that's controlled by Rothschild.

"IF my sons did NOT want wars... there would be none." — Gutle Schnaper (Rothschild)

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions... Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working AGAINST the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
— David Rockefeller, Memoirs, 2002

STRICT U.S. NUCLEAR FOREIGN POLICY:

"Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel's willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona [routine WMD inspections].... this Government's commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to the peace as the question of Israel's effort in the nuclear field."
— John F. Kennedy July 5, 1963

Immigration Policy & Being an "AMERICAN"

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.

But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.

We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

— Theodore Roosevelt (1907)

Buy local when possible! We should easily be exporting more goods to other countries than anyone, with close competition from Russia and China (who also have lots of capital, land and people). Foreign policies like United Nations, NATO, WTO, WHO, FAO, CAC, NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT are AGAINST the best interests of the United States because we surrender sovereignty to a higher authority than the United States.

Every major war the USA has ever seen, was planned and funded by the same group of elite international bankers. Their intention is to fund both sides of the war with high-interest wartime loans, and profit from weapons sales - with the sole cost being paid with American blood and American tax dollars. Below are some examples of wars that were designed by "false flag attacks" based on lies (also referred to as "Problem Reaction Solution").

"Why, of course, the people don't want war... But it is always a simple matter to drag the people along... That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
— Herman Goering

"Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or PROMULGATED, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government." — Henry Kissinger

To understand the USA's foreign policy towards Israel, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon (Hezbollah), Syria, and Palestine - one must read the POLICY PAPERS that refer directly to these countries. A crew of zionist neocons (israeli-American dual-citizens) wrote many POLICY PAPERS for the United States AND for israel from 1992-2002.

READ "A Clean Break"! I especially despise the bit about "selling unpopular policies domestically". This 1996 "war plan" was prepared for Benjamin Netanyahu, then Prime Minister of ISRAEL! ALL 5 countries israel lists as "enemies of the WEST" have been attacked or at war since it was written (israel sent assassins into Iran many times since 1996 assassinating top nuclear scientists). Read the rest of the signatures: Richard Perle (self-proclaimed prince of darkness) who was #1 in charge at the Pentagon on 9/11 as George W. Bush's Chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee. Douglas Feith was #2 Pentagon DoD as George W. Bush's Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from 2001-2005, David Wurmser was Dick Cheney's "Middle East Advisor". David's wife Meyrav Wurmser (who also signed "A Clean Break") works in DC at the Hudson Institute think-tank, and runs MEMRI and made up the LIE about "wipe israel off the map"). Combined, these were THE TOP 3 men at the Pentagon on 9/11 - all signing a foreign war plan in 1996 for israel to convince the USA to go to war with Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Palestine (North Korea is also targeted by these neocons).

"... to draw in the United States to sell unpopular policies domestically."

"This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq
— an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right."

"First and foremost, Israel’s efforts to secure its streets may require hot pursuit into Palestinian-controlled areas, a justifiable practice with which Americans can sympathize."

"An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran."

It's no wonder Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told Ray McGovern:
"ALL of the intelligence [about Iraqi WMD] turned out to be bad."

How did the American People
get conned into starting WW3?

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor..." - PNAC 2000, Rebuilding America's Defenses

"According to recent opinion polls, a large majority of Iraqis believe that the U.S. military has no intention to leave Iraq, and that it would stay even is asked by the Iraqi government to leave." — John Conyers

"I am a Korean War veteran. I support our troops as much as anyone in this body, but I do so by advocating redeployment out of Iraq as soon as it can be safely done." — John Conyers

What do Michael Ledeen (the American 'neo-conservative'), Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the Iranian presidential candidate of 'change') and Adnan Khashoggi (the opulent Saudi Arabian jet-setter) have in common?

They are all good friends and associates of Manuchehr Ghorbanifar (an Iranian arms merchant, an alleged MOSSAD double agent, and a key figure in the Iran/Contra Affair, the arms-for-hostages deals between Iran and the Reagan administration).

Why are the taxpayers of the United States of America handing the Zionist cowards billions of dollars worth of weapons for killing children? Why is the U.S. taxpayer paying for the Palestinian genocide?

Israel is not even a U.S. ally! According to former C.I.A. official Ray McGovern, the U.S. has asked Israel to sign a formal treaty of alliance, but Israel refuses, because it would have to define its borders. Since it is conducting an ever-expanding genocide, in order to steal more and more land, Israel does not want to say where its borders are. So it refuses to be a U.S. ally.

According to reliable estimates, our non-ally Israel has cost the American people more than a trillion dollars, including more than $100 billion in direct aid. And that’s not even counting the war in Iraq, which is a disguised war for Israel. Throw in Iraq, and the Zionists have stolen maybe five trillion dollars from our economy.