Post #35077 by albaby1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (28)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 0

Isn't the whole point of a military to protect economic interests?

Yes, but I kind of see the point here. You would military alliances (like NATO) to be an important part of a SecDef's portfolio. So a nominee that was well-versed in national security issues ought to know the members of a most security or military alliances off the top of their head. But the same isn't really true of economic or trade alliances, which serve purposes and perform functions that intersect less with the portfolio of the Department of Defense, rather than (say) the Department of State. So we might not necessarily expect a foreign policy wonk to be able to name the members of, for example Mercosur with the same facility as knowing which countries are in NATO or not.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (28)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.