My perception of the underlying resolution is that it says to the world the following: we are here, we want to get this resolution, we want to work together, but if you will not do it our way, then we are going to do it unilaterally, and in any event we assert the right to act unilaterally. It is part and parcel of the new strategic doctrine that has just been announced. For the life of me I do not understand why the administration chose this particular moment to proclaim this doctrine, which obviously raises ll sorts of additional red flags about what their intentions with respect to the U.S. role around the world. There is no question that the United States is the most powerful country in the world. I do not recall the precise figure, but the American military budget is more than the sum of I do not know how many countries that follow along behind us. Yes, we have incredible military resources and power. We can go around the world and whack anybody we choose. We can brush almost anyone aside. But is that what we want for our nation? Is that the way we choose to conduct ourselves? Why would we make such a choice when we have an opportunity, if we are smart and skillful and have the underlying military strength, to work in a way that brings the rest of the international community into concert with us?
John Sarbanes: “My perception of the underlying resolution is that it says to the world the following: we are here, we want to get this…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing U.S. foreign policy and military strategy in relation to a proposed resolution.
Share
More from John Sarbanes
I thank the chairman for yielding and recognizing me. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the Republicans' energy bill. I have deep concerns about this package overall in terms of its attack on our bedrock environmental laws. As a…
It's a national environmental treasure. It's a regional economic engine. It's been one of my top priorities since I've come to Congress.
It is important to be clear that EPA's proposed standards are reasonable, performance-based emissions standards and constitute neither a national electric vehicle mandate nor an internal combustion ban.
I was unable to vote today. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 272, H.R. 1606; and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 273, H.R. 3672. personal explanation





