What we can see from the 2024 US Presidential Debates- omit on next day

① An evaluation of the Policies in areas such
as the Economy and Diplomacy.

② Which candidate is more suitable in terms
of a basic “Presidential” as President?
Including in terms of their personal qualities,
visions, prospects, etc. Which one is more
suitable overall to be President of the United
States?

As for the evaluation of the Debate,
many media outlets, including the New York
Times, ABC, and satellite broadcaster CNN,
have published commentaries, so please
refer to those.
I wouldn’t take up specifics here.

However, during this debate themes,
the topic that is most closely related to
the themes of the Articles I am currently
posting on this site is the Foreign Policies 
of both candidates, so I will go into detail
about that point only.
In particular, if they were to become
president, the point is how would they
approach the ‘War in Ukraine’ and the
‘War between Israel and Hamas’ in the
Middle East.
Among these, the two candidates greatly
differed on how they would deal with the
War in Ukraine.

Candidate Harris is the same as President
Biden, in that she believes that the “United
States has been able to stop Russian
aggression because the US has provided
Ukraine with a lot of support, including
weapons.” On the background of this,
there is the stance that if left alone,
Russia will invade and expand into
European countries one after another,
after invading Ukraine.
Therefore, even if peace negotiations are
to be held with Russia, she stands on the
position that “After Ukraine has won to
a certain extent.”

In contrast, former President Trump’s
stance is to immediately enter into dialogue
and negotiations with Russia to end the war.
This seems like a good idea at the first
glance, but Candidate Harris points out the
following:

“Russian President Putin and other
dictators are rooting for Trump to become
president. Because if they say flattery to
Trump, he will follow this side (the dictators’
side) and the United States will become
quiet.
Then the dictators can do what they want.”

“If Trump had been president,
Ukraine’s capital, Kiev, would have been
Putin’s by now long ago. And by now,
Putin would have been thinking about
invading neighboring countries, such as
Poland.” (1)

(1) The following statements by
candidate Harris are that:
“It is absolutely well known that
these dictators and autocrats are
rooting for you to be president again
because they’re so clear, they can
manipulate you with flattery and
favors.”
“If Donald Trump were president,
Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right
now. Because Putin’s agenda is not
just about Ukraine. (His eyes would
have been) on the rest of Europe.
Starting with Poland.”

However, in my perspective,
I think that what Trump said, “immediately
entering into direct dialogue negotiations
with the top leader of the opposing country”
has important implications.
It is certainly important for the top leaders
of the countries at war to talk one-on-one
and negotiate toward peace.

However, at that time, “Calculating Motives”
will have no place whatsoever. International
Diplomacy is different from economic
transactions.
If one treat it like an economic transaction
and make easy and hasty decisions,
the one will quickly make a mistake and
will put the country in a predicament
position.

Direct Dialogue between the top leaders
is a serious battle that is approached in
good faith, with absolutely no falsehood or
calculation in heart, and with a holistic view.

Furthermore, Direct Dialogue between
top leaders is fundamentally different
from preparatory consultations and
negotiations held at the level of secretaries
of state or diplomats. It involves a heavy
sense of responsibility, seriousness and
tension, as one shoulders the weight of
one’s country.

I believe that Direct Dialogue between
top leaders should be based on deep
consideration not only of their own
countries’ interests and prosperity, but
also of the future prosperity and peace
of countries all over the world.
*
However, at this point in time, the Biden
administration, which continues to support
Ukraine, has yet to produce satisfactory
results. Peace negotiations between
Israel and Hamas and the release of
hostages have also not been realized.

In the future, even if Harris were to
become president, she would eventually
have to meet face-to-face with the head
of state of the other country and engage
in dialogue at some point.
Also, how will both candidates, Trump and
Harris, negotiate peace, reach an agreement,
and achieve peace In the future?
That is an issue for the future.

Relationship with my Latest Article

Now, the theme of the latest article on
my site is “Human Desire itself that causes
war and aggression.”
Also, it is about the “Treatment method”
for it.
The reason I talk in detail about
Buddha-nature, which is the main body of
the Law of Origin, and explain in detail about
“Ten Nyo-ze” and “Twelve In-Nen” is
because they are necessary laws for the
treatment. That is why I am talking about
them. → See the previous article.

Moreover, it is citizens to the last, who will
practically perfect this treatment method
and carry it out.
Not the president or foreign policy experts.
Presidents and foreign policy experts are
people who work in the specialized field of
international politics to try to stop wars.

If Citizens can achieve the “Treatment for
the Desire that causes war,” then no matter
who becomes the president of the
United States in the future, it would become
easier for the president to do his or her
diplomatic work and be easier to achieve
his or her purpose.

The parties to war will become easier to
make peace under favorable conditions for
both.
In addition, that “Establishment of Peace”
will not only benefit to the peace of the two
nations involved but contribute to the
realization of peace and prosperity for
all nations around the world.

In this sense, I am writing the present
article to bring about a complete end
to the wars that have been going on for
the last few hundred years, or even since
the beginning of Human History.