The defeat and retreat of the US in Afghansitan
Alan Dowd takes A Closer Look at the U.S.-Afghan Partnership Agreement. You may want to, also.
It reminds me of the Agreement the the US made with Vietnam at the end of that war. It simply covered their defeat and retreat and provided no lasting benefit.
Yet WaPo carries an article today arguing that Obama has a winning hand in his foreign policy.
The polls could hardly be clearer. In early April, a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 53 percent of Americans trusted Obama over Romney to handle international affairs. Only 36 percent trusted Romney more. On a list of 12 matters that a president would deal with, Obama enjoyed a larger advantage on only one other question, the handling of women’s issues. And on coping with terrorism, the topic on which Republicans once enjoyed a near-monopoly, Obama led Romney by seven points.
How did this happen? The primary reason, to borrow a term from science, is negative signaling: By the end of Bush’s second term, the Republicans’ approach to foreign policy was discredited in the eyes of a majority of Americans. The war in Iraq turned out (and this is being quite charitable) much differently than the Bush administration had predicted.
Bottom line is that Americans prefer military disengagement and diplomatic engagement which is Obama’s shtick rather than the reverse which was Bush’s shtick. They ignore or view favourably his embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood and his attacks on Israel.
Americans are war weary.