It is indeed troubling to hear of USA threats to Iran and just, in general, the non-stop warmongering.

It appears that Britain, France, Germany, the USA, Israel, other European nations, etc. have decided that nobody in the Muslim World can have nuclear power.

Although there is no UN "law," against nuclear power this is the policy of Israel and the Western nations and when nuclear power is mentioned it gets instantly translated in Western media and politicians as: nuclear weapons.

Yet, nuclear power and nuclear weapons are not the same thing, but the fear is that one can lead to the other.

I would worry more, personally, about a black market Russian nuclear suitcase bomb coming over the ...

It is indeed troubling to hear of USA threats to Iran and just, in general, the non-stop warmongering.

It appears that Britain, France, Germany, the USA, Israel, other European nations, etc. have decided that nobody in the Muslim World can have nuclear power.

Although there is no UN "law," against nuclear power this is the policy of Israel and the Western nations and when nuclear power is mentioned it gets instantly translated in Western media and politicians as: nuclear weapons.

Yet, nuclear power and nuclear weapons are not the same thing, but the fear is that one can lead to the other.

I would worry more, personally, about a black market Russian nuclear suitcase bomb coming over the Mexican border; but the issue is not just weapons -- it's domination of Oil and Israel in the Middle East.

Sometimes progress in politics is measured in inches or milimeters, I suppose. So at least the position on Iran (and Iraq and other issues) is BETTER than any other candidate and clearly -- clearly and strongly -- says that a lot of talking and diplomacy needs to happen.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/#iran

QUOTE:
Obama believes that we have not exhausted our non-military options in confronting this threat; in many ways, we have yet to try them. .. Obama opposed the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which says we should use our military presence in Iraq to counter the threat from Iran...

Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. ..Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress."

END QUOTE

While it's true that he has supported increasing troop levels that doesn't translate into an increased military budget. There's tons of fat that can be cut out of the military to offset the cost of having more troops.

The congress constantly buys weapons systems for the military that even the Pentagon doesn't want. Stop that save money.

Missile Defense System that won't be able to stop missiles that deploy decoys and use jamming devices. Save money.

Getting our of Iraq saves money. If Obama had been in office we wouldn't have even been there to begin with.

I think the ABC article stating that Obama's geopolitical stance more aggressive than Bush was quite a reach when they only provided ...

While it's true that he has supported increasing troop levels that doesn't translate into an increased military budget. There's tons of fat that can be cut out of the military to offset the cost of having more troops.

The congress constantly buys weapons systems for the military that even the Pentagon doesn't want. Stop that save money.

Missile Defense System that won't be able to stop missiles that deploy decoys and use jamming devices. Save money.

Getting our of Iraq saves money. If Obama had been in office we wouldn't have even been there to begin with.

I think the ABC article stating that Obama's geopolitical stance more aggressive than Bush was quite a reach when they only provided one example "that Obama would strike a meeting of Al-Qaeda that included Bin Laden in Pakistan if Musharraff would not act". That's it. That's the only example they provided.

In the ABC article it states that Obama would negotiate with individuals perceived to be our enemy. Direct dialogue gets rid of misunderstanding and heads off conflict. That saves money. And it is certainly not more aggressive militaristically than Bush anyway you want to look at it.

Also look at who else is quoted in Santos article, Robert Kagan. Who is Robert Kagan, he is a conservative Republican, from the Reagan administration, who is a PNAC member. PNAC are the crazoids who got us to invade Iraq. They are not credible people to be quoting about anything.

Well, Bobby, I hope you're right...but he should make that VERY clear to the voters because so far I don't trust his foreign policy stance beyond "willingness to negotiate". He needs to be more forthright on exactly how he intends to approach the Pentagon--is he going to downsize their bloated budget, dismantle the profiteering contractor buddy system or let the business go on as usual. So far, I haven't heard him say so but then I don't listen to all of his speeches unlike some who seem to like his style. I am unimpressed so far because I've heard a lot of "hope" and "change" and "yes we can" but I need to know the nuts and bolts of closing down the USA's Empire of bases all over the freak...

Well, Bobby, I hope you're right...but he should make that VERY clear to the voters because so far I don't trust his foreign policy stance beyond "willingness to negotiate". He needs to be more forthright on exactly how he intends to approach the Pentagon--is he going to downsize their bloated budget, dismantle the profiteering contractor buddy system or let the business go on as usual. So far, I haven't heard him say so but then I don't listen to all of his speeches unlike some who seem to like his style. I am unimpressed so far because I've heard a lot of "hope" and "change" and "yes we can" but I need to know the nuts and bolts of closing down the USA's Empire of bases all over the freakin' planet!
This will be MY criteria of whether to vote for a guy with lots of promise. and...Who are his close foreign policy advisors?

True, I haven't heard him mention the budget in speeches I have been able to listen to or hear commentary about.

Personally, I think he is walking a fine, election line, not to give everyone political ammo. While wise politically it doesn't give us all the information we would like to know right now.

Here is an article that compares and contrasts Clinton's foreign policy adviser circle with Obama's. However, a person should find more than one article which is what I will attempt to do. Here's the link. Well here's two links one more positive, one kind of negative. Obama's circle looks like a mix of hawks and advocates of softer power. Seems like he might be wanting to get a mix of views.
[...

True, I haven't heard him mention the budget in speeches I have been able to listen to or hear commentary about.

Personally, I think he is walking a fine, election line, not to give everyone political ammo. While wise politically it doesn't give us all the information we would like to know right now.

Here is an article that compares and contrasts Clinton's foreign policy adviser circle with Obama's. However, a person should find more than one article which is what I will attempt to do. Here's the link. Well here's two links one more positive, one kind of negative. Obama's circle looks like a mix of hawks and advocates of softer power. Seems like he might be wanting to get a mix of views.

Obama Clinton circle compared One.
Obama Clinton circle compared Two.

He has addressed the contractor issue. Here's some quotes:

Make Government Spending More Accountable and Efficient: Obama will ensure that federal contracts over $25,000 are competitively bid. Obama will also increase the efficiency of government programs through better use of technology, stronger management that demands accountability and by leveraging the government's high-volume purchasing power to get lower prices.

* PAYGO: Obama voted in 2005, 2006, and 2007 to reinstate pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) federal budget rules.

* No-Bid Contracts: Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.[/...

read more»

He has addressed the contractor issue. Here's some quotes:

Make Government Spending More Accountable and Efficient: Obama will ensure that federal contracts over $25,000 are competitively bid. Obama will also increase the efficiency of government programs through better use of technology, stronger management that demands accountability and by leveraging the government's high-volume purchasing power to get lower prices.

* PAYGO: Obama voted in 2005, 2006, and 2007 to reinstate pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) federal budget rules.

* No-Bid Contracts: Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.

* Against Raising the Federal Debt Limit: In 2006, Obama voted against misguided Republican efforts to raise the statutory debt limit at the same time the Republicans were pushing through massive debt-financed tax cuts for the wealthy.