Where do you stand on foreign policy?
Pretty spiffy survey type thing. If you are well read on policy, see how closely you match up to what you think.
http://americanchoices.org/Your Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: Diplomacy
Secondary: Human Rights, Global Markets, Cooperation
Well, it looks like it matches me pretty well: a liberal with pro-business leanings.
Your Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: Global Markets
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty, National Interest
In a one dimensional world, does that make me a liberal or conservative?
Your Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: Global Markets, National Interest
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty
Your Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: National Interest
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Protections
Your Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: National Interest
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Global Markets
Primary: Diplomacy, Human Rights, Protections, National Interest
Secondary: none
Primary: Military
Secondary: Human Rights, Global Markets, National Interest
That sounds about right for me.
Mine was like Radar's, but without the "Diplomacy" and "Sovereignty" BS.
[COLOR=indigo]
Primary: Protections, National Interest
Secondary: Sovereignty
[/COLOR]
Oh my God!:eek: I agreed with Radar.
[COLOR=indigo]That's it! No more cookies for you![/COLOR]
Originally posted by Elspode
Secondary: none
How do you get no secondary interests? Did you never check that box that asked 'somewhat agree'?
Amazingly* I come out identical to Wolf (Primary: National Interest
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Protections). Whoda thunk? Wolfie, let's blow this popcorn stand; dump the guys and set up a home business -providing handmade goods, freelance editing and drive-through psychiatric intervention! We'd need lots of room out back for your target practice and for me to finally realize my dream of creating 'art cars.'
* Don't get me wrong; I adore Wolf and enjoy all her posts, but would never in a million years have guessed that we could be lumped together so precisely when categorizing our views of US foreign policy priorities. That site must really suck.
On second thought, it would probably be just as much fun to dump the popcorn stand and blow the guys . . . your call, Wolf.
Erm . . . I guess I'll be first in line? :rolleyes:
Your Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: Protections
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty, National Interest
Such is as it is.
thought i'd bring this one back to the surface.
Primary: National Interest
Secondary: Military, Sovereignty, Protections
eh, close enough for a 12 question point and click survey.
My summaryBigV's Foreign Policy Priorities:
Primary: Cooperation
Secondary: Diplomacy, Human Rights
I manually recorded my postions on the various sliding scales:
(all scales 0-10 first to second)
0 1 2 3 [SIZE=5]4.0[/SIZE] 5 6 7 8 9 10
Diplomacy vs Military
0 1 2 3 4 5 [SIZE=5]6.5[/SIZE] 7 8 9 10
Sovereignity vs Human Rights
0 1 2 3 4 [SIZE=5]5.0[/SIZE] 6 7 8 9 10
Protections vs Global Markets
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 [SIZE=5]7.5[/SIZE] 8 9 10
National Interest vs Cooperation
I had a problem with this. I feel in many cases it is IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST to cooperate. You may call it what you will.
An interesting little poll. I may revisit it and read the discussion guides.
Primary: Cooperation
Secondary: Diplomacy, Human Rights, Global Markets
4-6-6-2
Primary: National Interest
Secondary: Diplomacy, Human Rights, Global Markets
Primary: Diplomacy
Secondary: Human Rights, Protections, Cooperation
Interesting, though there are only twelve questions.
The use of the titles is a bit rough. It doesn't account for my centrist leanings. I did it on a center zero to +/-5 scale.
Primary: National Interest
Secondary: Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Global Markets
Diplomacy v Military: -1.5
Good diplomacy is generally the best path to peace and stability. We should use the strength of our alliances and international organizations to accomplish our goals. Military force should be an option only when our security is clearly threatened.
Sovereignty v Human Rights: -0.5
The United States must avoid getting into the "nation building" business, which can be costly, both in terms of money and American lives. We should encourage the development of democracy by setting a good example, and by helping out when asked.
Protections v Global Market: +0.5
Expanding global markets creates stronger ties between nations and helps ensure peace. While globalization does have its costs, on the whole it is beneficial to most people.
National Interests v Cooperation: -2.5
The US cannot solve the world's problems, and it's naive to think that we can. Nations must learn to help themselves, and we should stay focused on pursuing our interests. International organizations are too corrupt and inefficient to do any good.