Who makes foreign policy in the USA?

[Dinner]

Indeed.

[Drake Tungsten]

It's true that only the President can sign treaties (to be ratified by the Senate), but there's nothing to prevent the Speaker from going on a "fact finding" mission and to later propose legislation based upon her findings.

There's common sense and tradition. Then again, you Americans have little experience with either, so it doesn't surprise me that Pelosi would act in defiance of both...

[MichaeltheGreat]

What's the common sense in spending two more years doing nothing because an incompetent lame duck ideologue considers meeting or talking with a regime to be a "reward" for good behavior?

Whether you like the *******s in Damascus and Tehran or not, they're there, and they wield power in the region.

Bushies' proverbial ship of state ran aground on a sandbar before it even slipped its moorings and tried to head out of harbor. Why wait two more years to actually start having a foreign policy in the mideast?

[DinoDoc]

What power does Pelosi have to actually conduct a foreign policy, MtG?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
What power does Pelosi have to actually conduct a foreign policy, MtG?

What says she can't.

[Berzerker]

same as every member of Congress, they represent us to the world

[Drake Tungsten]

If your tourists are any indication, you should keep the number of Americans "representing you to the world" as small as possible...

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
What power does Pelosi have to actually conduct a foreign policy, MtG?

How do you define "conduct a foreign policy?"

Pelosi can pretty much go anywhere and talk to whoever she wants. If that results in things happening that are useful, then it's really semantic as to whether she's conducting foreign policy or not.

[Drake Tungsten]

The Prime Minister's Office issued a rare "clarification" Wednesday that, in gentle diplomatic terms, contradicted US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's statement in Damascus that she had brought a message from Israel about a willingness to engage in peace talks.

According to the statement, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert emphasized in his meeting with Pelosi on Sunday that "although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the Axis of Evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East."

Olmert, the statement clarified, told Pelosi that Syria's sincerity about a genuine peace with Israel would be judged by its willingness to "cease its support of terror, cease its sponsoring of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad organizations, refrain from providing weapons to Hizbullah and bringing about the destabilizing of Lebanon, cease its support of terror in Iraq, and relinquish the strategic ties it is building with the extremist regime in Iran."

The statement said Olmert had not communicated to Pelosi any change in Israeli policy on Damascus.

Pelosi, who met in Damascus with Syrian President Bashar Assad over the objections of US President George W. Bush, said she brought a message to Assad from Olmert saying that Israel was ready for peace talks.

"We were very pleased with the reassurances we received from the president [Assad] that he was ready to resume the peace process. He was ready to engage in negotiations for peace with Israel," Pelosi said after meeting Assad.

She said the meeting with the Syrian leader "enabled us to communicate a message from Prime Minister Olmert that Israel was ready to engage in peace talks as well."

According to officials in the Prime Minister's Office, however, this was not what transpired during her meeting with Olmert.

The officials said Olmert had told Pelosi that he thought her trip to Damascus was a mistake, and that when she asked - nevertheless - whether he had a message for Assad, Olmert said Syria should first stop supporting terrorism and "act like a normal country," and only then would Israel be willing to hold discussions.

The first part of that message, the officials said, was lost in what was reported from Damascus on Wednesday.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879247562&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The success of Pelosi's visit is already apparent...

[DinoDoc]

Apparently she can't even make policy for Israel either.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I could be wrong on all this, though. Any Americans care to weigh in with their thoughts on my theory?

It would work if the majority of Dems and independents went along with it. However, I really doubt they would, if those such as the WaPo are putting the smackdown on Pelosi in lead editorials entitled "Pratfall in Damascus" and leading with...

"HOUSE SPEAKER Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered an excellent demonstration yesterday of why members of Congress should not attempt to supplant the secretary of state when traveling abroad."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040402306_pf.html

[RGBVideo]

These are diplomatic trips where the Congress' representatives can't promise anything, but they'll seek and scout for different options of conducting foreign policy. Every private citizen can help Israel out by transporting their peace proposals.

I doubt Pelosi can achieve anything with this trip and it'll only serve her as a PR stunt. Kerry did a similar trip with another Senator in Nicaragua during the 1980s, and it didn't have any results either.

IMHO the Senators would spend their time in a better way if they'd do their actual jobs instead of these probably fruitless trips, but trying to spin Pelosi as a traitor or a moron who doesn't know what's allowed and what's not is misleading for the casual observer.

[Dinner]

It all comes back to Republican Congressmen were doing the exact same thing conducting almost identical talks and the wingnuts didn't have a problem with it. Pelosi goes out to do the same thing, attempting to nudge the process forward, and suddenly the red state hacks scream bloody murder. They're just hypocrits and they know it.

[DinoDoc]

Since when is the Post a Right Wing paper? Are you really that much a partisan quack as to assume that anyone critical of Pelosi's misadventures in Syria is a far right loon?

[Ecthy]

Originally posted by VJ
IMHO the Senators would spend their time in a better way if they'd do their actual jobs instead of these probably fruitless trips, but trying to spin Pelosi as a traitor or a moron who doesn't know what's allowed and what's not is misleading for the casual observer.

Pelosi is Speaker of the House, not a Senator. The latter have only one job, to represent the states in the union.

(Congress = House + Senate)