Having read many of your posts on this board, I've reach a conclusion that you strongly dislike President Bush. That you don't trust him, that you believe he's evil, that he's interested only in personal power and the wealth of his friends. That he doesn't care about black people (oops, sorry--that was Kanye, not you). That he doesn't care about anyone not in his tax bracket...
Am I wrong? Have I misconstrued your comments over the past couple months that I've been reading?
If so, I sincerely apologise.
But if not, then obviously you do bring some significant emotional baggage to your intellectual analysis. And emotion is, by definition, irrational. Emotion is the opposite of reason. That doesn't mean they can't co-exist. That means it takes some effort to make sure one doesn't adversely affect the other.

Now, do I believe US policy is based purely on rational judgements? Of course not. That would be a noble goal, but it's not very realistic--particularly in a political structure. Reason is one factor. Emotion is another (actions immediately after 9/11 were no doubt colored by emotion). Politics is another (both domestic and international). But none of that is a Bush invention. It's the way of group dynamics and global politics and always has been.

So again, we need to focus on the policy and on the decisions, rather than just on the process or the people.

As for your challenge regarding US Foriegn Policy, it's just a bit all-encompassing. US foreign policy comprises everything from lumber imports from Canada to whether we should nuke Iran. But I can offer some suggestions for things that might play into all of those decisions. Like, "What's best for the US right now?" And "What's going to be best for the US in the long run?" And "What can we do to build our standing in the world that won't harm us in some way?" "What can we actually do?" "What will be the likely cost?" And maybe, "Is there a better way to achieve the goal?"

I'd like to believe that questions like these are considered for every policy decision made. You might disagree with the answers that this administration comes up with, but that doesn't mean their way of reaching their conclusion is any less valid than your own.

This post is already too long. These debates are so much better designed for execution over a frosty pitcher than across the ethernet. But my encouragement to emphasize reason and downplay emotion remains. Consider the possibility that Bush is not the nefarious sub-human some might suggest. Consider that he might actually believe he's acting in the country's best interests.