Barry Posen (2013) and Brooks, Wohlforth, & Ikenberry (2013) present two differe

Barry Posen (2013) and Brooks, Wohlforth, & Ikenberry
(2013) present two different suggestions for the future of US foreign policy.
Posen advocates pulling back, retrenchment, or limiting future US commitments
around the world. By contrast, Brooks, Wohlforth, & Ikenberry (2013)
suggest that the US should continue to be deeply engaged in the world or
“leaning forward”, because they argue this engagement benefits the US.
Which of these competing arguments is more compelling,
persuasive or convincing? These articles were written in 2012/2013—has the US
moved more toward one of these suggestions or the other? What actions taken by
Trump or Biden were consistent with either Posen’s argument or Brooks,
Wohlforth, and Ikenberry’s? Between the two, which direction do you suggest the
US take its foreign policy?
In your work make sure you are taking on some of the
specific evidence cited by the authors. I am not interested in your gut
reactions, or your personal feelings about any particular president. This is a
question about grand strategy going into the future. Stick to making arguments
about the evidence. These are both well-researched articles written by famous
scholars—how could they reach such different conclusions, and which one does a
better job of explaining the evidence?
please copy these links and use them for evidence i will log you in with my account, just press login and a alert will tell me
the stance i would prefer is Brooks, Wohlforth, and ikenberry in that the U.S. should have allies
https://moodle.plattsburgh.edu/pluginfile.php/2410703/mod_resource/content/4/Brooks%2C%20Ikenberry%2C%20%20Wohlforth%202013%20Lean%20In%2C%20In%20Defense%20of%20American%20Engagement.pdf
https://moodle.plattsburgh.edu/pluginfile.php/2410704/mod_resource/content/1/Posen%202013%20Pull%20Back%20The%20Case%20for%20a%20Less%20Activist%20Foreign%20Policy.pdf