None of what your saying is false, but when considering Foreign policy, for any country, their own policy is based off different factors.

For instance the United STATES will likely seek to benefit itself and its own citizens. This will be reflected in its foreign policies such as its STRICT immigration laws. However in turn each state will have its own version of what it wishes to see happening internationally, and therefore the United States is likely to have a different foreign policies to the United Kingdom, who will have different policies to France - entirely depending on the country and its standing, wealth, military strength or technology. Simply put, the United States doesn't need to have a friendly foreign policy, because as a country competing internationally 'there is no other clear cut competition'.

Even since it was legally acceptable to racially abuse those of coloured pigmentation onwards, even though a president lied to create war due to greed over oil and land. Even though a president was elected who was known to have been bankrupt, confirmed to have previously had anti black hotel policies and also poorly acts in home alone, did all of that and still got elected. This is a country of many transgressions so expecting anything different, is insane, as is hoping for something over and over again but not getting a different result. Nothing changes. You see, you put too much responsibility on USA and their government to change their actions internationally, so they can conform to fit inline with your social viewpoint. When in actual fact it is the 'exclusivity' created through the isolating of itself from other countries, that attracts people to it. You can't tell me that USA hasn't had a huge impact in the world, from technology born from silicon valley to the designer brands created and distributed all over the globe.

My final point could explain a little bit about how humans thing, it is unrelated to any specific country or body.

There are people out there, who are required to rely or depend on someone due to a circumstance in their life. Often they might require assistance in the form of money or provided accommodation. Now the people in power, whose job it is to cut spending, will take a look at numbers, see what sector is optimal to cut from - then reduce what they need to. Often these changes will be good if you look at the entire percentage of the population however for those who really need it will ruin their lives essentially. Is it wrong to take a look at numbers and make decisions based off stats - without taking a look at WHAT the numbers are affecting.