The current issue of Newsweek critiques a speech John McCain gave over a month ago. Old news, right? Well, apparently not — no one seemed to talk about the comprehensive, yet confused, speech made by a would-be president.

McCain proposed expelling Russia from the G-8 (the council of world economic powers), and adding India and Brazil, while rebuffing China. This active exclusion of two major world powers would undo the work of two of McCain's GOP predecessors — Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

The article's author, Fareed Zakaria, lamented McCain's betrayal of pragmatism:

I write this with sadness because I greatly admire John McCain, a man of intelligence, honor and enormous personal and political courage. I also agree with much of what else he said in that speech in Los Angeles. But in recent years, McCain has turned into a foreign-policy schizophrenic, alternating between neoconservative posturing and realist common sense.

McCain's position actively opposes all non-democracies, at the expense of US strategic allies and national security.

McCain isn't the only one making extreme foreign policy statements. For some democratic comparison, read more.

Last week, Hillary Clinton told Good Morning America that she would "totally obliterate" Iran if it foolishly considered launching an attack on Israel. Countries around the world took notice, and critics called the Clinton statements foolish and dangerous.

Barack Obama's openness to communicating with adversaries has been considered radical; yet, it seems the other candidates are over compensating with dangerous rhetoric. Do you think it's smart for the US to pursue a "with us, or against us" foreign policy? Can the US afford to actively exclude non-democratic powers?

Source and Source