Those amenable to shifting their position should understand that there are other options, and that it is the current FP that is leading America to a premature decline.

Perhaps I missed something, but what makes you think the dysgenic, degenerate idiocracy goes anywhere?

You are proposing a foreign policy for who exactly? All policy certainly foreign will be determined by who’s in charge, I daresay the Victors. Absent conflict the Boss today is the Boss tomorrow.

I think America is locked into its journey of decline. There is neither the will no the vision to see past the futility of the current path which will lead to a collapse (as they intend) but not to a restoration of power (due to their delusions). I don’t think the Asians will be so quick to jump on board with China, as both Japan, Indonesia, and Australia see themselves as viable counterweights, especially if they work together. But that’s besides the point.

Anti-America though is not China. China is not the great entrepreneurial nation. China is the nation of cuthroat business. People tolerate China because they have money and mind their own business, but nobody really likes them. On the other hand, people love America in ideal, I’ve seen it again and again.

But yes, as said before, I would bet against America putting its good qualities to good use. For them the way down is the future.

There is no evidence that there are Russian troops in the Ukraine, as the Germans, OSCE, and everyone else has demonstrated. The only ones who continue making such claims are the Joke Ukrainian Government (and not all of it at that) and the Americans, neither of which have ever provided definitive evidence despite the availability of overhead satellites and videocameras in the region.

There is ample evidence of Voentorg, or Russian logistical support, but that’s not the same thing. You’d know if the Russians did put their boots on the ground in the Ukraine because that fighting would be over in twenty four hours.

It adds to my not taking ISIS seriously. All the so-called ISIS connections just show their nature as American-backed tools with limited independence.

Keep in mind that the Libyan civil war has not ended either and the remnants of the Green Army remain at work with the various tribes which control much of Western Libya.

It’s at this point I disagree and that’s why I think the situation is completely hopeless. America likes to think it has some innate appeal, but it has found allies only by systemically co-opting or subverting the ruling class of other countries. The average foreigner watching American TV shows or Hollywood movies might have a benign view of America, but the ruling classes do not. They know what American power really looks like. If they’re an ally, they know where their own power comes from, and its limitations. They know how stifling American hegemony is.

The fact that nobody in Western-aligned countries can ever say anything that might offend American sensibilities is telling. For example, Japan can’t openly discuss its demographic crisis except in terms of pouring more feminism onto the fire. Surely every Japanese leader has considered that the foreign system of family law imposed by the occupation government might be to blame, even if he can’t say it out loud, and he’s probably taken the further logical step of thinking about why he can’t say it out loud. What could the US even do to back off here? Only a radical break with liberalism can solve Japan’s crisis. This is an existential threat and yet it cannot be dealt with except by leaving the US sphere of influence.

That’s the basic flaw in most analyses of the transition from American to Chinese hegemony: it’s assumed that people would prefer America, if only it’d stop acting like America. But an America that doesn’t get to loudly tell others what to do while maintaining little capability or desire to understand their culture or the problems they face is no America at all. There are inherent limitations to American ideology and it can only engage other countries in this crude and belligerent way. China, on the other hand, plays a different game entirely, and both the American and European leadership are ideologically (and perhaps culturally) blind to it.

What you’re calling for necessitates the transformation of America into anti-America. But America is never going to change in this respect and, without military and economic supremacy, it will suffer a much more substantial loss of global influence than anyone now suspects and much more quickly than anyone now imagines. The developed countries all have problems that can only be solved by leaving the American sphere of influence, it’s just a question of who breaks first. The developing countries don’t want what America is selling now there’s an alternative source of investment with (seemingly) no strings. Besides, there’s already an anti-America and its name is China.

By all serious accounts, that’s what we have. But it hasn’t worked out well.

ISIS isn’t inflicting acts of foreign terrorism. Do your research into the suspected cases and the most you get is ‘inspiration’. Everything else is a dud and fearmongering. And yes, the Shiite lack of discipline is causing trouble but that doesn’t make ISIS any better. The Sunni clans revile being ruled by yet a new class of foreigners, this time pseudo-Sunni Wahhabis who’ve never even read the Quran. And no, these Wahhabis can’t fight for the life of them. Compare that to the Shiite militia, trained by the formidable Iranian infantry and there is no comparison. Their continued survival is enabled by American logistical and informational support, which I’ll have to post on in the future to substantiate.

Yemen is also very important, great that you noticed that. People forget about it but its a massive anti-Saudi hole that drives them crazy. The Anti-American rebels have finally weakened the American-backed president to the point that open rebellion is in the air and the Saudis have begun bombing. Its a very important place.

Rest assured, America won’t be taking my advice. If they were capable of that they wouldn’t have all the problems that they do. But its important that we, as the future of the West, have conceptions of what a healthy foreign policy looks like.

Syria is of course a mess, with new reports that Al Nusra front is experiencing something of a resurrection after a string of defeats.

But Iran doesn’t necessarily need to defeat ISIS. In fact, they may want to keep it going, since it presents a bigger threat to countries with Sunni majorities (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan) all enemies of Iran, than it does Iran itself. Perhaps Syria is a worthwhile sacrifice to these ends, so long as they can keep Lebanon as a forward operating base, which is of course essential.

Yemen is also going to be critical to Middle East policy. Why do I get the sense we’re going to see some Western intervention there very soon, embroiling us in a sectarian hellhole between Iran and Saudi Arabia? Not that I really care too much. Giving sound foreign policy advice to a Modernist America in order to prolong its hegemony in the world is not high on my list of priorities.