Ukraine

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Pot, Kettle

Not sure I agree. For instance, many including myself were supporting Bush after 9/11. It wasn't until the real motivation for the policy was exposed that support really eroded. This is a fundamental difference from today...

Bush didn't do anything during the Georgia event and granted it was a different scenario. After, Obama admin relations under Medvedev were generally constructive until Putin came back.

It's a different phase of the post Cold War world.

-spence

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

Not sure I agree. For instance, many including myself were supporting Bush after 9/11. It wasn't until the real motivation for the policy was exposed that support really eroded.
-spence

I TOLD YOU SO..

[nightfighter]

I think;

Spence is one of the most educated and intelligent members here, who can state a compelling argument with a lot of references to back up his argument

I think;

Except for the above reference for supporting Bush, post 9/11, Spence posts views that exclusively reflect a Democratic view. Period.

I think;

Spence should be working for the Democratic party or working for a politician writing and running campaigns. (you missed your calling)

I think;

Obama is out of his league here. I will leave it at that. Putin wins this round by default.

I think;

Putin is still KGB, always will be KGB. The world was stupid to think anything less.

I think;

The US learned nothing from the Soviets ten years in Afghanistan. Place is the absolute worst shiithole on the face of the planet. Been there..... Need to get our troops out of there ASAP.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Nobody seems to be able to name specific Obama policy decisions that "caused" the Ukraine crisis...hmmm...

Which Obama policies "prevented" the Ukraine crisis? Was it the reset? Was it telling Putin to wait till he got re-elected, and he would be more flexible then? Was it the reversal of putting anti-missile sites in Poland and the Czech Republic? Was it the in-your-face LGBT stuff during Sochi? Was it his superior understanding about the possibility of normal, workable relations with Russia? With the fabulous working agreement about how to handle Syria's WMD? Or how Russia would co-operate against Iran working to get nuclear weapons capability? All that worked out so well. And showed Putin how strong we are and how determined to repel any threats by Russia to retake any of their old satellites . . . right?

I also wonder how much petty domestic undermining of Obama by Republicans in Congress has emboldened our adversaries. God, it's like some of them get off with the "Putin out maneuvered him" stuff.

Petty domestic undermining by opposition parties is a long standing tradition in this country, going all the way back to 1800. That anyone would take that as weakness against our adversaries is stupid. We have demonstrated those squabbles were not obstacles to our power. That is, when we actually projected power with a strong military and a don't tread on me posture. When we weren't apologetic about our strength and willingness to use it. When we didn't consider ourselves just another country which undeservedly acted like bullies, but actually considered ourselves a mighty force for good and a threat to those who crossed us.

Emboldening our enemies by criticism during war, is another matter. No matter how much the opposition party disagrees with the war, criticizing the policies and saying we are wrong and should leave endangers our troops. Disunity in time of war emboldens the enemy and is bordering on treason.

Putin didn't invade Ukraine and take Crimea because we have petty domestic squabbles. He didn't fear us, or the EU. He invaded because he perceived a weakness. And he did that before the "Putin outmaneuvered him stuff." And Putin, apparently DID outmaneuver him. Why not get off on the truth? It's not as if Obama doesn't deserve it.

Ultimately, what's happening in the Ukraine is bigger than any one President. As I said before, we need a unified long-term strategy.

-spence

OK, since you ask for specificity, "Name specific Obama policy decisions" that "we need" for "a unified long-term strategy."

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Which Obama policies "prevented" the Ukraine crisis? Was it the reset? Was it telling Putin to wait till he got re-elected, and he would be more flexible then?Was it the reversal of putting anti-missile sites in Poland and the Czech Republic?

Yea, the idea of world leaders trying to collaborate is pretty offensive is it not? I'd note that:

A) US/Russia relations were advancing under Medvedev including further reductions in nuclear weapons via New Start.

and...

B) Obama may have scrapped Bush's missile defense plan, but he replaced it with something just as effective or according to Robert Gates even better...

"This new approach provides a better missile-defense capability for our forces in Europe, for our European allies and eventually for our homeland than the program I recommended almost three years ago," Gates told reporters at the Pentagon after Obama spoke. [USA Today, 11/17/09]

Was it the in-your-face LGBT stuff during Sochi?

Nice, blame it on Billy Jean King. Good lord, you're starting to sound like Jim.

Was it his superior understanding about the possibility of normal, workable relations with Russia? With the fabulous working agreement about how to handle Syria's WMD? Or how Russia would co-operate against Iran working to get nuclear weapons capability? All that worked out so well. And showed Putin how strong we are and how determined to repel any threats by Russia to retake any of their old satellites . . . right?

Syria may have been clumsy at times but I think Russia was actually worried we'd take military action. They responded and now Syrian WMD is being destroyed. I'd like to hear your better solution...do nothing? Invade? How well would that have gone over?

Petty domestic undermining by opposition parties is a long standing tradition in this country, going all the way back to 1800. That anyone would take that as weakness against our adversaries is stupid. We have demonstrated those squabbles were not obstacles to our power. That is, when we actually projected power with a strong military and a don't tread on me posture. When we weren't apologetic about our strength and willingness to use it. When we didn't consider ourselves just another country which undeservedly acted like bullies, but actually considered ourselves a mighty force for good and a threat to those who crossed us.

Unfortunately we try and actually care about people. It's a bit inconsistent, but I wouldn't attempt to peg it on any one President.

I'd go back to several good books I've referenced in the past...we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary.

Emboldening our enemies by criticism during war, is another matter. No matter how much the opposition party disagrees with the war, criticizing the policies and saying we are wrong and should leave endangers our troops. Disunity in time of war emboldens the enemy and is bordering on treason.

Even on matters less than war, measurement should be taken. I guarantee you Russia looks at the position of all sides of Congress to evaluate what room the Administration has to move within. Yes there are doves and hawks, but petty disrespect is far worse.

Putin didn't invade Ukraine and take Crimea because we have petty domestic squabbles. He didn't fear us, or the EU. He invaded because he perceived a weakness. And he did that before the "Putin outmaneuvered him stuff." And Putin, apparently DID outmaneuver him. Why not get off on the truth? It's not as if Obama doesn't deserve it.

Completely disagree. This was a defensive action, and he did only what he thought he could get away with. Putin fears the EU and Nato because they will destroy the counter reforms Putin has used to maintain power.

The situation in the Ukraine was if anything the result of a failed bribe attempt. The annexation of Crimea was via intimidation. These actions have no sustainable legs. We may be very well witnessing the last flash of the USSR fading into memory...

OK, since you ask for specificity, "Name specific Obama policy decisions" that "we need" for "a unified long-term strategy."

We've already buffered our defenses with a more effective missile defense.

Looks at the unity with the EU and the impact. The Ruble is at a record low. The Russian market has dropped 10% this month. Money is flooding out of Russian banks. Their 3rd world economy is on the brink of recession.

And now Germany, perhaps the most important EU nation is warning on harsher economic sanctions.

I'd say this is being played pretty well.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Syria may have been clumsy at times but I think Russia was actually worried we'd take military action. They responded and now Syrian WMD is being destroyed.

-spence

THE HAGUE Thu Mar 6, 2014 (Reuters) - Syria will miss a major deadline next week in the program to destroy its chemical weapons production facilities, sources at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons said on Thursday.

Damascus has already missed several deadlines laid out in the agreement.

"That will definitely be missed," said an official involved in discussions with Syria, referring to the March 15 deadline.

"DEADLINES IGNORED"

Syria is not taking the deadline for the destruction of production facilities seriously, another source at the OPCW said on Thursday.

"They are not doing things in the time frame they promised they would," the source said. "The process is in volatile waters."


Putin must be shaking in his boots

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

...we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary.




-spence

But several months later, the problem has not just disappeared as the president hoped it would. The American people may be no more interested in dealing with Syria today than they were last August, but at least Secretary of State John Kerry seems willing to admit, albeit privately, that the administration has been party to a complete disaster that may well come back to haunt the U.S. in a catastrophic way.

The connection to the Iran nuclear talks can’t be denied. Syria did far more than highlight the irresolution of Obama’s foreign policy. It gave a textbook illustration of the mortal dangers of weakness on the international stage. That weakness was not lost on Iran when it negotiated an interim nuclear deal in which the U.S. discarded its economic and military leverage and tacitly recognized Tehran’s “right” to enrich uranium. Just as Assad believes the current diplomatic track in Syria will not undermine his rule, so, too, his Iranian backers are understandably confident of their ability to negotiate and achieve Western recognition for their nuclear program. And just as America’s inability to act in Syria may have engendered a powerful al-Qaeda enclave there, blind faith in diplomacy is setting in motion a train of events that could lead directly to an Iranian bomb. The result of all this is not only a more dangerous Middle East but also an American homeland that is demonstrably less secure because of Obama’s continuing and uncomprehending failures.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...iran-al-qaeda/

March 4, 2014 Times of Israel

President Barack Obama is a “low-IQ US president,” whose threat to launch a military offensive should nuclear talks fail is an oft-cited punchline in the Islamic Republic, particularly among children, an Iranian general said on Tuesday.

“The low-IQ US president and his country’s Secretary of State John Kerry speak of the effectiveness of ‘the US options on the table’ on Iran while this phrase is mocked at and has become a joke among the Iranian nation, especially the children,” General Masoud Jazayeri said, according to the semi-official Fars News Agency.

Jazayeri was responding to the US president’s interview in Bloomberg on Sunday, in which Obama maintained that the Iranian leadership should take his “all options on the table” stance — including the warning of a potential military strike — seriously.

Read more: Iranian general: Obama's threats are 'the joke of the year' | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/iranian...#ixzz2wYOLgKro
Follow us: @timesofisrael on Twitter | timesofisrael on Facebook



there's a clear pattern developing

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Syria may have been clumsy at times but I think Russia was actually worried we'd take military action.

Well that's big of you to admit. Obama says that using chemical weapons would be crossing a red line or something, they guy gasses his own people, and he's still in power? You don't think that emboldens would-be despots?

I'm not saying we should have gone to war. But you cannot say, on the international stage, that there's a line Assad better not cross, and then let him cross it without consequence.

Spence, if you warn your kids not to do something, and they do it anyway, how do you respond? By sticking your head in the sand and wishing it didn't happen?

Jeez...

"I think Russia was actually worried we'd take military action"

Putin stood by Assad through the whole thing. He stood by his ally. He was hardly afraid of what your hero was going to do. Putin through down the gauntlet, his buddy Assad faced no consequences, and Obama looked like an incompetent child in front of the entire world.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Well that's big of you to admit. Obama says that using chemical weapons would be crossing a red line or something, they guy gasses his own people, and he's still in power? You don't think that emboldens would-be despots?

I'm not saying we should have gone to war. But you cannot say, on the international stage, that there's a line Assad better not cross, and then let him cross it without consequence.

Spence, if you warn your kids not to do something, and they do it anyway, how do you respond? By sticking your head in the sand and wishing it didn't happen?

Jeez...

The result of the red line was Syria agreeing to get rid of their chemical weapons and to date a lot of that has occurred. It isn't perfect...but you can't say there wasn't a serious action.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd say this is being played pretty well.

-spence

Trust me, this is no game. I lived through the entire cold war and
Cuban Missile Crisis and wouldn't want anybody to be subjected to that again.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Unfortunately we try and actually care about people. It's a bit inconsistent, but I wouldn't attempt to peg it on any one President.

I'd go back to several good books I've referenced in the past...we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary.


I'd say this is being played pretty well.

-spence

What is talked about in the following linked article has been going on for a long time. If we "actually care about people" why are we so silent about this? If we go back to the "several good books" you've referenced in the past, would they explain how we could "lean" on those perpetrating the slaughter? Are we playing this pretty well? Or is jerking Assad around and gesturing threats at Putin so much more important? After all, the Assad and Ukraine thing will eventually exit the stage, and the opportunity for some new play acting will present itself to us. If the lives of these slaughtered Christians is so unimportant, and none of our business . . . and I'm willing to concede that may be true . . . then why do we care about Ukraine? Or the EU, which should be able to grow up and take care of itself anyway: http://www.humanevents.com/2014/03/2...st-christians/

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

What is talked about in the following linked article has been going on for a long time. If we "actually care about people" why are we so silent about this? If we go back to the "several good books" you've referenced in the past, would they explain how we could "lean" on those perpetrating the slaughter? Are we playing this pretty well? Or is jerking Assad around and gesturing threats at Putin so much more important? After all, the Assad and Ukraine thing will eventually exit the stage, and the opportunity for some new play acting will present itself to us. If the lives of these slaughtered Christians is so unimportant, and none of our business . . . and I'm willing to concede that may be true . . . then why do we care about Ukraine? Or the EU, which should be able to grow up and take care of itself anyway: http://www.humanevents.com/2014/03/2...st-christians/

Interesting article, though I think the author is just trying to project his opinion and spin everything around it to fit.

I've seen plenty of reporting about the suffering of Christian minorities, especially in the past few years with the Arab Spring. I can't think of the last time I read anything on Palestinian suffering.

The characterization of violence toward Israel as "radical Islam" fails to note something pretty important...that the conflict in Palestine didn't really start that way. His argument then over a false "grievance" totally ignores that Israel has brought a lot of their problem upon themselves.

This isn't a product of a biased media, it's a product of history.

I think there certainly is a grievance out there but much of it is toward Cold War institutions that led to little progress in Islamic nations.

Then again, I don't see the media reporting on this either...but hey, blame the media...I'm sure you could spin anything to make it stick.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Yea, the idea of world leaders trying to collaborate is pretty offensive is it not? I'd note that:

A) US/Russia relations were advancing under Medvedev including further reductions in nuclear weapons via New Start.

and...

B) Obama may have scrapped Bush's missile defense plan, but he replaced it with something just as effective or according to Robert Gates even better...






Nice, blame it on Billy Jean King. Good lord, you're starting to sound like Jim.


Syria may have been clumsy at times but I think Russia was actually worried we'd take military action. They responded and now Syrian WMD is being destroyed. I'd like to hear your better solution...do nothing? Invade? How well would that have gone over?


Unfortunately we try and actually care about people. It's a bit inconsistent, but I wouldn't attempt to peg it on any one President.

I'd go back to several good books I've referenced in the past...we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary.


Even on matters less than war, measurement should be taken. I guarantee you Russia looks at the position of all sides of Congress to evaluate what room the Administration has to move within. Yes there are doves and hawks, but petty disrespect is far worse.


Completely disagree. This was a defensive action, and he did only what he thought he could get away with. Putin fears the EU and Nato because they will destroy the counter reforms Putin has used to maintain power.

The situation in the Ukraine was if anything the result of a failed bribe attempt. The annexation of Crimea was via intimidation. These actions have no sustainable legs. We may be very well witnessing the last flash of the USSR fading into memory...


We've already buffered our defenses with a more effective missile defense.

Looks at the unity with the EU and the impact. The Ruble is at a record low. The Russian market has dropped 10% this month. Money is flooding out of Russian banks. Their 3rd world economy is on the brink of recession.

And now Germany, perhaps the most important EU nation is warning on harsher economic sanctions.

I'd say this is being played pretty well.

-spence

"we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary."

(1) that art of leaning into an adversary, really only works when the adversary isn't a raving lunatic. Unfortunately for your pacifism, there are a few of those out there. Diplomacy will not work with some of them.

(2) that art of diplomacy doesn't do much to help the little Syrian kid being gassed to death by a guy who was specifically warned by your hero not to do that.

Afghanistan was not a quick-fix, but a response to an attack. You may have heard something about that attack, if not, I can also refer you to some books.

As to Iraq, the use of force was approved by the US Senate. The list of Senators voting for the use of force, included the following right wing neo-cons: Senators Clinton, Biden, Kerry, Edwards, Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer.....all right-wing nutjobs I suppose? If you have no use for those who lean towards militaristic quick-fixes, and you were referring to Iraq, can we all assume you won't be voting for Hilary?

You're not making this very hard anymore.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

(1) that art of leaning into an adversary, really only works when the adversary isn't a raving lunatic. Unfortunately for your pacifism, there are a few of those out there. Diplomacy will not work with some of them.

Putin isn't a lunatic, he's just unpredictable and has really consolidated power.

Leaning into an adversary isn't a form of pacifism, but it requires a long-term strategy. In one breath you'll talk tough and in the next say you're not advocating for war. Which is it?

(2) that art of diplomacy doesn't do much to help the little Syrian kid being gassed to death by a guy who was specifically warned by your hero not to do that.

Sure it can with enough unity. Obama's biggest problem early with Syria wasn't drawing a line, it was not having enough global support.

Afghanistan was not a quick-fix, but a response to an attack. You may have heard something about that attack, if not, I can also refer you to some books.

As to Iraq, the use of force was approved by the US Senate. The list of Senators voting for the use of force, included the following right wing neo-cons: Senators Clinton, Biden, Kerry, Edwards, Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer.....all right-wing nutjobs I suppose? If you have no use for those who lean towards militaristic quick-fixes, and you were referring to Iraq, can we all assume you won't be voting for Hilary?

What? This is all news to me...

You're not making this very hard anymore.

So at one time it was hard? Please let me know, I'd like to relive some of those sweet sweet memories.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Nobody seems to be able to name specific Obama policy decisions that "caused" the Ukraine crisis...hmmm...

I also wonder how much petty domestic undermining of Obama by Republicans in Congress has emboldened our adversaries. God, it's like some of them get off with the "Putin out maneuvered him" stuff.

Ultimately, what's happening in the Ukraine is bigger than any one President. As I said before, we need a unified long-term strategy.

-spence

I think you have a point when you say that Obama could not have done much to stop Putin in the Ukraine. It's also worth noting that in the 2012 debate, when Romney speculated that Russia would be a major foreign policy challenge for the next President, Obama mocked him for it. Who was right, and who was wrong? It shows, yet again, Obama's amazing inability to see how things will play out (said the Surge would not work, said the Stimulus would keep unemployment below 8%, said I could keep my doctor, said 8 jillion jobs were shovel-ready, etc).

"I also wonder how much petty domestic undermining of Obama by Republicans in Congress has emboldened our adversaries"

None. How's that for an answer. I don't think our enemies are emboldened by the GOP. Our enemies do get emboldened, when Obama lets pakistan improson the doctor who told us where Bin Laden was. Why would anyone, anywhere, stick their necks out for us? This is how Obama repays our fiends who help us at great risk to themselves?

He's a joke.

"we need a unified long-term strategy"

Well, that should be easy. Because when he got elected in 2008, I heard a lot of talk about how, unlike Bush, Obama would be able to build effective coalitions because Obama had so much charm, he would make everyone love us. (2 days later, Chicago was the first city cut from the prospective list of Olympic host cities, which tells you how much validity there was to that claim).

[buckman]

Here's the thing about the overly educated , which I'm not lumping spence in with, they tend to be somewhat brainwashed by our liberal education system and somewhat isolated from the reality of the working blue collar worker.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by buckman

Here's the thing about the overly educated , which I'm not lumping spence in with, they tend to be somewhat brainwashed by our liberal education system and somewhat isolated from the reality of the working blue collar worker.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

brainwashed? Its called being educated to be able to think for yourself and form individual opinions.

The working blue collar worker is going to be brainwashed by talk radio and what he is spoon fed by what ever news source he watches and the less educated you are, generally the more attracted you are to news sources that are opinion based because guess what...you don't have to think to form your opinions, they are given to you.

Now don't get me wrong here.. you get idiotic libs who suck off of Rachael Maddow's tit as well...

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Nebe

brainwashed? Its called being educated to be able to think for yourself and form individual opinions.

The working blue collar worker is going to be brainwashed by talk radio and what he is spoon fed by what ever news source he watches and the less educated you are, generally the more attracted you are to news sources that are opinion based because guess what...you don't have to think to form your opinions, they are given to you.

Now don't get me wrong here.. you get idiotic libs who suck off of Rachael Maddow's tit as well...

I thought Maddow was a guy ?
Ya these college kids really are free thinkers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by buckman

Here's the thing about the overly educated , which I'm not lumping spence in with, they tend to be somewhat brainwashed by our liberal education system and somewhat isolated from the reality of the working blue collar worker.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agree. Most have never been out in the real world as either a blue or white collar worker. They spend all their years in higher education reading and studying books authored by Professors who did the same thing.

Give me a blue or white collar worker any day ,who has either run or been in business ,over the over the highly educated to serve in any political office.
Common sense comes from experience in the real world.

Debuch, Great summary of the failed policies of the Administration leading up to the Ukraine crisis.

[Sea Dangles]

Since when does the ability to put a shine on a turd make one seem educated?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Since when does the ability to put a shine on a turd make one seem educated?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bra #^&#^&#^&#^&ing oh
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Raven]

what's Putin's next strategic move.....? hmmm?

now that he's gained an inch

[spence]

Yawn, more cut and paste. And an Israeli Neocon rag at that....

So the "low IQ Obama" is a joke among Iranian children. Are you freaking serious? You really took the time to quote that?

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

So the "low IQ Obama" is a joke among Iranian children. Are you freaking serious? You really took the time to quote that?

http://youtu.be/MpraJYnbVtE
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

And an Israeli Neocon rag at that....

'Neocon' that's one of those code words used to try to deflect isn't it?

I included a New Republic rag article for balance to the "neocons" rag

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...total-disaster

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

'Neocon' that's one of those code words used to try to deflect isn't it?

I included a New Republic rag article for balance to the "neocons" rag

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...total-disaster

I'm waiting for Nebe to chime in with "Lmao!" Maybe Spence can respond with "Yawn".

Gee, Scott, you're so cruel . . . linking a liberal rag to destroy another Obama failed or lack of policy. But wait . . . it IS a rag, so that's got to count against it. And you DID paste it--on that ground alone makes it no good. How dare you!

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I'm waiting for Nebe to chime in with "Lmao!" Maybe Spence can respond with "Yawn".

Gee, Scott, you're so cruel . . . linking a liberal rag to destroy another Obama failed or lack of policy. But wait . . . it IS a rag, so that's got to count against it. And you DID paste it--on that ground alone makes it no good. How dare you!

yup, funny how those who dwell in personal opinion descend into yawns and you tube videos(isn't that essentially "cut and paste"?) when you attempt to include some facts in the conversation or point out the obvious flaws in their opinions, seems juvenile for such highly educated intellectuals....the self and mutually ordained brightest among us

"we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary" = nonsense...but it probably sounded really smart and highly educated to some

[JohnR]

"we've become too reliant on militaristic quick fixes and lost the art of leaning into an adversary."

Soft power loses most effectiveness without hard power to be an alternative / leverage.

With Political Hacks in key leading positions in an administration that disregard history, operational art is not at the table to lean in on.

[Nebe]

Lmao!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[striperman36]

John Kerry is such an awesome SOS.