Obama/Biden: Proud of re-orienting toward a "war" foreign policy

Joe Biden: we are as warlike as any
administration could be expected
to be

You have to trust Joe Biden to say what's really on the Obama administration's mind.

This time it was at the West Point graduation, where, according to Boston.com, he first credited the President with having ended all the wars he inherited:

"Winding down these longs wars has enabled us to replace and rebalance our foreign policy," Biden told the Army cadets and their families at the storied academy's football stadium.

Let's ignore the fact that this administration only executed Bushco's withdrawal timetable from Iraq (where we still have tens of thousands of troops, by the way), doubled down in Afghanistan, and started its own conflicts in Somali, Uganda, Yemen, and Libya--with possible plans for more military interventions in Syria and Iran.

Yep, let's ignore all that because war is good foreign policy:

 Biden's speech echoed some of the themes of military success struck by President Barack Obama in his commencement address at the U.S. Air Force Academy last Wednesday. Biden, like Obama, said U.S. combat troops have returned home from Iraq, the conflict in Afghanistan is winding down and American commandos killed al-Qaida terrorist leader Osama bin Laden in May 2011.

"Those warriors sent a message to the world that if you harm America, we will follow you to the end of the earth," Biden said.

The academy speeches by Obama and Biden counter an assertion from Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney that the president has led from behind in world affairs. Biden said the United States will continue to take charge internationally and focus on Asia, particularly China, which he called "the most critical relationship to get right." 

Barack Obama: 'scuze me, W,
can I borrow this banner?

This feels a lot like W standing under a big f--king banner that says, "Mission Accomplished," doesn't it?

The reality is that President Obama has fully embraced the Clausewitzian concept of war as politics continued "by other means."

The original concept of American foreign policy was national defense and and any war-of-choice as a failure of diplomacy.

Strangely enough, only Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is making that case these days: 

I pledge to reduce military spending by 43 percent -- to the disbelief of those who refuse to let go of interventionist, nation-building foreign policies. As I have said many times, if we stop playing offense and focus on defense, a 43 percent cut in military spending is not only feasible, it will still leave us as the preeminent military power on the globe.

Do we need hundreds of thousands of American troops in Europe and Japan? Can we not get by with only enough nukes to eradicate mankind 8 or 10 times? Do we need to have a military base in every nook and cranny of the world? The answer to all these is no -- if we simply return to the constitutional notion that national defense actually means defense. Keeping America safe is government's most basic duty, and I support a strong national defense -- but one we can afford.

A policy of non-intervention, which Ron Paul has advocated, will allow us to return to an affordable level of defense spending, and will result in a safer America that is not constantly sowing seeds of hatred among those who would do us harm.

---snip---

Non-intervention is the constitutional and prudent policy America should adopt. That, however, is very different from isolationism. Our vast international economic interests and our imperative to remain vigilant in a dangerous world demand that the greatest nation on earth remain engaged beyond our borders. Relationships, however, do not require us to topple foreign leaders we don't like or build nations other than our own.