Is the United States' Credibility in Tatters?

[Jason]

How come we never talk about the credibility or international standing of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, or whatever other first world countries that are so great?

Yeah, what's Canada up to anyway?

We're the quiet guys at the G8 table.

[piscator]

How come we never talk about the credibility or international standing of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, or whatever other first world countries that are so great?

Yeah, what's Canada up to anyway?

We're the quiet guys at the G8 table.

You just barely beat out Mexico. Most likely because they don't count illegal drugs in Mexico's GDP.

[Coito ergo sum]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23721918

On the streets of Cairo it's not just a fledgling democracy that lies in ruin. US policy too lies in tatters - in the eyes of many - or at least America's reputation and credibility.

Since the ouster of Hosni Mubarak in 2011, the US has struggled to strike a balance between support for the tenuous progress towards democracy and protection of its national security interests.

The White House has tried hard to work with whoever is in power in Egypt but has ended up with no friends and little influence in Cairo.

Washington's recent diplomatic efforts in Egypt have failed one after the other. Up until his removal from power, the US tried to counsel Mr Morsi to accept a compromise with the army and the protesters.

The US also appealed to the military not to remove Mr Morsi. After the coup, Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns travelled to Cairo twice to help mediate between the military and the Muslim Brotherhood. But even getting an audience in Cairo these days is a hard task for US officials.

The US refrained from calling Mr Morsi's removal a coup for fear of upsetting the country's generals and the millions who demanded Mr Morsi's departure.

Coito.

What is your view of what US credibility was before these events?

I think it was better. I use credibility more like "believable" -- "does what he says" -- can be trusted to act in conformity with one's words.

I don't think the word in this context means "favorability" or that sort of thing.

The problem with US foreign policy is that it is inconsistent, ad hoc and generally weak. See Syria and Egypt as a good example. I think that's what the bbc article is getting at. It's not about whether Obama is liked or preferred to his predecessor -- it would be the reduction in clarity and consistency of US policy.

[Audley Strange]

Whether the U.S. citizenry choose to see it or not, outside the confines of the borders of the States, they are seen as The Empire. This means that whatever they do or do not do, they are going to be criticised by someone. The Empire always becomes the common enemy and like it or not, being the only awake superpower every action or inaction is going to affect people globally. It is insane to ask for consistency across differing countries uprisings as if because Tunisia and Syria are both predominantly Muslim makes it the same country.

You can't do good, you can't do bad. Whether deliberately or otherwise the U.S. positioned itself into the position of The Empire, it reaped the rewards and has now felt a taster of the ramifications. The only difference between this iteration of The Empire and others is we live in a time where its heart is easily targetted, if not open to sacking.

[Coito ergo sum]

Whether the U.S. citizenry choose to see it or not, outside the confines of the borders of the States, they are seen as The Empire.

Well, I can't comment on how you view the US, but I would just say that the American people are not the only nation where the people are, shall we say, provincial.... to take your Empire metaphor another step.

This means that whatever they do or do not do, they are going to be criticised by someone. The Empire always becomes the common enemy and like it or not, being the only awake superpower every action or inaction is going to affect people globally. It is insane to ask for consistency across differing countries uprisings as if because Tunisia and Syria are both predominantly Muslim makes it the same country.

The inconsistency, to me, is not in treating different problems differently, it's in treating the a single problem in a waffling fashion.

The "whatever we do, we're wrong" idea is one that many Americans have been bothered about for some time. Doesn't seem to matter what we do, we're criticized. I'm sure that if we had not taken the lead on Iraq, we would have been criticized for not acting and leaving a rogue dictator in power because it suited our own interests....

[Audley Strange]

Whether the U.S. citizenry choose to see it or not, outside the confines of the borders of the States, they are seen as The Empire.

Well, I can't comment on how you view the US, but I would just say that the American people are not the only nation where the people are, shall we say, provincial.... to take your Empire metaphor another step.

I don't get what you mean here? Are you saying there's fuckwits everywhere? Obviously, thats the point I was making. Also I wasn't using Empire as a metaphor I've spoke to people across the globe who genuinely think that. (Oh if you thought I meant Lucas, nah, I mean the preception of behaviour of Empire, rather than sith lords)

[Cormac]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23721918

On the streets of Cairo it's not just a fledgling democracy that lies in ruin. US policy too lies in tatters - in the eyes of many - or at least America's reputation and credibility.

Since the ouster of Hosni Mubarak in 2011, the US has struggled to strike a balance between support for the tenuous progress towards democracy and protection of its national security interests.

The White House has tried hard to work with whoever is in power in Egypt but has ended up with no friends and little influence in Cairo.

Washington's recent diplomatic efforts in Egypt have failed one after the other. Up until his removal from power, the US tried to counsel Mr Morsi to accept a compromise with the army and the protesters.

The US also appealed to the military not to remove Mr Morsi. After the coup, Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns travelled to Cairo twice to help mediate between the military and the Muslim Brotherhood. But even getting an audience in Cairo these days is a hard task for US officials.

The US refrained from calling Mr Morsi's removal a coup for fear of upsetting the country's generals and the millions who demanded Mr Morsi's departure.

Coito.

What is your view of what US credibility was before these events?

I think it was better. I use credibility more like "believable" -- "does what he says" -- can be trusted to act in conformity with one's words.

I don't think the word in this context means "favorability" or that sort of thing.

The problem with US foreign policy is that it is inconsistent, ad hoc and generally weak. See Syria and Egypt as a good example. I think that's what the bbc article is getting at. It's not about whether Obama is liked or preferred to his predecessor -- it would be the reduction in clarity and consistency of US policy.

I see.

I'm not so sure. This is the problem with Realpolitik. It strips away your credibility.

[Jason]

How come we never talk about the credibility or international standing of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, or whatever other first world countries that are so great?

Yeah, what's Canada up to anyway?

We're the quiet guys at the G8 table.

You just barely beat out Mexico. Most likely because they don't count illegal drugs in Mexico's GDP.

Our GDP is 150% of Mexico's and we beat Russia in by a country mile. It used to be the G7.

Mexico is busy inventing new shapes for hardshell tacos. The EU has a seat by itself at the kids table.

[pErvinalia]

How the hell does Canadia make so much money? What do you lot do and sell there?

[Jason]

Coal, crude oil, forestry products, energy (we sell a lot of electricity to the US), gold, and probably a lot of exports I'm not thinking of at the moment. We sell a lot of stuff.

[DaveDodo007]

Looks like we should invade Canada then, smug bastards.

[Clinton Huxley]

Coal, crude oil, forestry products, energy (we sell a lot of electricity to the US), gold, and probably a lot of exports I'm not thinking of at the moment. We sell a lot of stuff.

Export Bank Heads too.

[pErvinalia]

Coal, crude oil, forestry products, energy (we sell a lot of electricity to the US), gold, and probably a lot of exports I'm not thinking of at the moment. We sell a lot of stuff.

Same as us. I guess being right on the doorstep of the US is perfect for access to markets cheaply.

[Coito ergo sum]

Whether the U.S. citizenry choose to see it or not, outside the confines of the borders of the States, they are seen as The Empire.

Well, I can't comment on how you view the US, but I would just say that the American people are not the only nation where the people are, shall we say, provincial.... to take your Empire metaphor another step.

I don't get what you mean here? Are you saying there's fuckwits everywhere? Obviously, thats the point I was making. Also I wasn't using Empire as a metaphor I've spoke to people across the globe who genuinely think that. (Oh if you thought I meant Lucas, nah, I mean the preception of behaviour of Empire, rather than sith lords)

well, I think the people who call the US an "empire" are using the term wrongly. But, I think what they really mean is that the US is really really powerful and influential and has a presence and influence all over the globe. Yes, indeed it does.

[Coito ergo sum]

Coal, crude oil, forestry products, energy (we sell a lot of electricity to the US), gold, and probably a lot of exports I'm not thinking of at the moment. We sell a lot of stuff.

In short, the Canucks strip the environment of natural resources and fossil fuels while lobbying the rest of the world not to do so on the grounds of global climate change....