• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Are they beginning to smell the coffee?

Tam

Well-known member
Washington Post
President Obama’s foreign policy is based on fantasy
By Editorial Board, Published: March 2

FOR FIVE YEARS, President Obama has led a foreign policy based more on how he thinks the world should operate than on reality. It was a world in which “the tide of war is receding” and the United States could, without much risk, radically reduce the size of its armed forces. Other leaders, in this vision, would behave rationally and in the interest of their people and the world. Invasions, brute force, great-power games and shifting alliances — these were things of the past. Secretary of State John F. Kerry displayed this mindset on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday when he said, of Russia’s invasion of neighboring Ukraine, “It’s a 19th century act in the 21st century.”
That’s a nice thought, and we all know what he means. A country’s standing is no longer measured in throw-weight or battalions. The world is too interconnected to break into blocs. A small country that plugs into cyberspace can deliver more prosperity to its people (think Singapore or Estonia) than a giant with natural resources and standing armies.

Unfortunately, Russian President Vladimir Putin has not received the memo on 21st-century behavior. Neither has China’s president, Xi Jinping, who is engaging in gunboat diplomacy against Japan and the weaker nations of Southeast Asia. Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is waging a very 20th-century war against his own people, sending helicopters to drop exploding barrels full of screws, nails and other shrapnel onto apartment buildings where families cower in basements. These men will not be deterred by the disapproval of their peers, the weight of world opinion or even disinvestment by Silicon Valley companies. They are concerned primarily with maintaining their holds on power.


Mr. Obama is not responsible for their misbehavior. But he does, or could, play a leading role in structuring the costs and benefits they must consider before acting. The model for Mr. Putin’s occupation of Crimea was his incursion into Georgia in 2008, when George W. Bush was president. Mr. Putin paid no price for that action; in fact, with parts of Georgia still under Russia’s control, he was permitted to host a Winter Olympics just around the corner. China has bullied the Philippines and unilaterally staked claims to wide swaths of international air space and sea lanes as it continues a rapid and technologically impressive military buildup. Arguably, it has paid a price in the nervousness of its neighbors, who are desperate for the United States to play a balancing role in the region. But none of those neighbors feel confident that the United States can be counted on. Since the Syrian dictator crossed Mr. Obama’s red line with a chemical weapons attack that killed 1,400 civilians, the dictator’s military and diplomatic position has steadily strengthened.

The urge to pull back — to concentrate on what Mr. Obama calls “nation-building at home” — is nothing new, as former ambassador Stephen Sestanovich recounts in his illuminating history of U.S. foreign policy, “Maximalist.” There were similar retrenchments after the Korea and Vietnam wars and when the Soviet Union crumbled. But the United States discovered each time that the world became a more dangerous place without its leadership and that disorder in the world could threaten U.S. prosperity. Each period of retrenchment was followed by more active (though not always wiser) policy. Today Mr. Obama has plenty of company in his impulse, within both parties and as reflected by public opinion. But he’s also in part responsible for the national mood: If a president doesn’t make the case for global engagement, no one else effectively can.


The White House often responds by accusing critics of being warmongers who want American “boots on the ground” all over the world and have yet to learn the lessons of Iraq. So let’s stipulate: We don’t want U.S. troops in Syria, and we don’t want U.S. troops in Crimea. A great power can become overextended, and if its economy falters, so will its ability to lead. None of this is simple.

But it’s also true that, as long as some leaders play by what Mr. Kerry dismisses as 19th-century rules, the United States can’t pretend that the only game is in another arena altogether. Military strength, trustworthiness as an ally, staying power in difficult corners of the world such as Afghanistan — these still matter, much as we might wish they did not. While the United States has been retrenching, the tide of democracy in the world, which once seemed inexorable, has been receding. In the long run, that’s harmful to U.S. national security, too.

As Mr. Putin ponders whether to advance further — into eastern Ukraine, say — he will measure the seriousness of U.S. and allied actions, not their statements. China, pondering its next steps in the East China Sea, will do the same. Sadly, that’s the nature of the century we’re living in.

Even the Washington Post is starting to see Obama's Foreign Policies are DANGEROUS.

Add that with their declaring Obama had the LIE OF THE YEAR over Obamacare and Jonathan Turley's testimony on Obama's Overreach and one might think the Left is starting to WAKE THE H*LL UP. FINALLY. :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Tam said:
Even the Washington Post is starting to see Obama's Foreign Policies are DANGEROUS.

Add that with their declaring Obama had the LIE OF THE YEAR over Obamacare and Jonathan Turley's testimony on Obama's Overreach and one might think the Left is starting to WAKE THE H*LL UP. FINALLY. :roll:

yet, many do not see the meddling that was done beforehand...
 

Steve

Well-known member
yet, many do not see the meddling that was done beforehand...

the meddling was obvious. Nuland.. f--- EU.. may have been a clue..

they were openly planning a behind scenes coup..

or should I say.. assisting and advising..


while publicly for the president to show restraint.. and accept an agreement to step aside.. one which he did agree to..

Obama and crew are naive at best.. they totally screwed this one up as well..

(but it still doesn't justify Russia invading)
 

Tam

Well-known member
Do they have the right to provide threats that if they don't submit to then they will MAKE THEM. :roll:



(Reuters) - Ukraine mobilized for war on Sunday and Washington threatened to isolate Russia economically after President Vladimir Putin declared he had the right to invade his neighbor in Moscow's biggest confrontation with the West since the Cold War.

"This is not a threat: this is actually the declaration of war to my country," Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk said in English. Yatsenuik heads a pro-Western government that took power in the former Soviet republic when its Moscow-backed president, Viktor Yanukovich, was ousted last week
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Steve said:
(but it still doesn't justify Russia invading)

they have the right to house military in Crimea. How is that an invasion

KIEV, Ukraine — The embattled new government of Ukraine accused Russian forces of a major escalation in military pressure over control of the Crimean Peninsula on Monday, saying Russia had deployed 16,000 troops in the region over the last week and had demanded that Ukrainian forces there surrender within hours or face armed assault.

The troops, Mr. Sergeyev wrote, had moved to “seize, block and control crucial governmental and military objects of Ukraine in Crimea.”

We used to have several bases in Canada. Does that mean we can set up shop and demand you surrender?
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Tam and Steve...why is it, you are now believing the Western MSM, when they are promoting Barry

I have a bit of history on this issue...

and am able to do some research and see what is going on.. not only now.. but has been for the last several hundred years..


so little of my views are coming form the MSM or Obama
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Wee are all able to do a little bit of research. Even hundreds of years.

What experience do you have, that the rest of us do not

Is US military experience greater than Canadian

Why so
 

Tam

Well-known member
You tell us why are you taking the word of an EX- KGB thug that wants nothing more than to control the Ukraine and any other country he can walk over?
Why are you denying what the people in the Ukraina are saying. Did the mission from the Ukraine lie to the UN and if they did why didn't the Russian Ambassador, sitting right there, tell the UN that they were not stationing 16000 troops in the Crimean Peninsula and taking Control of border crossings? What he said was the President, that was legally impeached, asked them to be there. You claim they have a right to station troops on their bases but what gives them the right to take control of border crossings, and fly into Ukrainian air place?

If Obama was to get impeached would he have the right to go to a foreign country he was back door dealing with and ask them to send in the troops to take back control of the country and reinstate him as President? Because that is what the Ukraine Government is saying is happening and by what the Russian Ambassador said it sure looks like that is what is happening.


Putin wants to control the Region and if he is not stopped he will take over the Ukraine and move on to the next country that fits into his little plan. Where does it stop Hyp. How many countries does he get to TAKE OVER BY FORCE before the rest of the world steps in? Don't forget he still controls parts of Georgia.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Tam, I believe Putin over Barry.

Who do you believe

Putin does not want to be caught in lies. Barry could care less.

Putin covers all his bases, Barry covers none, and flies by the seat of his pants and gets his citizens killed. Putin protects his citizens.

Who had this situation figured out before it started
 

Tam

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Tam, I believe Putin over Barry.

Who do you believe

Putin does not want to be caught in lies. Barry could care less.

Putin covers all his bases, Barry covers none, and flies by the seat of his pants and gets his citizens killed. Putin protects his citizens.

Who had this situation figured out before it started

Where have I ever said I believe Barry, I must have been sleeping when I posted that one?

I have spent the last few days listening to reporters discussing the issue at length with US ret. Military. These guy are voicing their opinions and when it comes to Foreign policy and Putin I'll take their word over the likes of Obama any day of the Week. As far as the media, the Left bias media in the US is even waking up to the fact Obama has no d*mn idea what he is doing but to believe them without looking to see what is being reported in other countries is not always the best thing to do.

Do you believe reports when the person is being quoted to have said something and the reply from the other side is a quote that does NOT deny what was said? The Ukraine said Russia was moving in 16000 UNWANTED troops and the only thing the Russian in the room said was we were asked to be there by the FORMER KICKED OUT AND ON THE RUN PRESIDENT.

What gives the FORMER President the right to request a foreign country's ex KGB murderous thug dictator, that he wants to make deals with and his country's citizens don't, to move troops in and return him to power?

As I see it the US supported the protestors right to protest but did they move troops in to protect them NO but Putin moved his troops in to protect his interest in the country which he was going to lose if the President was replace in the new election that was called.

Here in Canada if we don't like what the Government is doing we can recall them without blood shed by electing a different government why can't the Ukraine? They did not like what their President was doing, they asked him to resign and when he didn't the government voted to impeach and then they called for a new election. He then ran off to Russia and sent their troops in to take back control for him. THAT IS WRONG.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Tam said:
hypocritexposer said:
Tam, I believe Putin over Barry.

Who do you believe

Putin does not want to be caught in lies. Barry could care less.

Putin covers all his bases, Barry covers none, and flies by the seat of his pants and gets his citizens killed. Putin protects his citizens.

Who had this situation figured out before it started

Where have I ever said I believe Barry, I must have been sleeping when I posted that one?

When did I ever say that you do believe Barry
 

Tam

Well-known member
hypocritexposer"} Tam said:
I believe Putin over Barry[/b].

Who do you believe

Putin does not want to be caught in lies. Barry could care less.

Putin covers all his bases, Barry covers none, and flies by the seat of his pants and gets his citizens killed. Putin protects his citizens.

Who had this situation figured out before it started

From another thread.

Hypocritexposer"} said:
I have specifically said that it is hard to believe either side at this point.

:? Sorry but I Believe Putin over Barry means something different than It is hard to believe either side at this point Hyp.

And as for you saying I believed Barry I guess that might have come from you asking why I'm believing MSM that we all know have spent the last five years pushing his version of things to the point of destroying their own credibility. :roll:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Putin does not want to be caught in lies.

that would almost be funny if he wasn't so dangerous..

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/03/putin-s-crimea-propaganda-machine.html



But as it turns out, Crimea’s streets are not exactly paved with extremists—a fact that has proven troublesome for Russian state TV channels looking to find token far-right bogeymen. They’ve had to resort to tricks to get the right characters for Russian audiences—making much, for instance, of Sachko Bilyi, a buffoon who visited a local parliament with his AK-47 machine gun. No one in Ukraine thinks much of Bilyi, other than that he’s a clown, but Russian TV is now claiming that squads made up of thousands of Bilyis are terrorizing Ukraine’s civilians and intimidating MPs.

The Russian media also reported on “skirmishes” on the streets of Crimea and showed a video about “extremists in Crimea attacking Russian soldiers.” As it turns out, the video was actually made on February 20, when close to 100 protesters, aid workers and journalists were shot by snipers in Kiev. That day, several cameramen filmed the terror on location—


A bus filled with people dressed like paramiliatry fighters, toting machine guns and grenade launchers, were filmed by Russian journliasts. It appeared instantly on the Internet and Russian TV channels, labeled as “The Right Sector from the Western Ukraine attacking peaceful Russian citizens and killing soldiers in Crimea.” But if one looks closely, it is possible to make out several important details: the bus from ‘the Western Ukraine’ in fact has a Crimean license plate number, and the fighters are armed with GM-94 grenade launchers and AK-100 machine guns, which are only used by Russian soldiers. Another question: how did Right Sector extremists manage to get to Simferopol on a big bus after all the roads to Crimea were blocked three days ago by armed police and Russian soldiers? Several jounralists tried to pass through the cordons, but in vain. Apparently only armed fighters and extremists can get permission to go to Crimea.

if you still think Putin cares about lies.. then you are ignoring his reputation for lining..

call it a lie or propaganda,.. but the soviets are masters of it...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Seems the US state dept. ran with the same type of propaganda a bit ago.




State Dept. report describes ‘rising tide’ of anti-Semitism




* Ukraine, where there were several instances of vandalism targeting Jewish buildings and cemeteries, as well as incitement by ultranationalist figures.



Read more: http://www.jta.org/2012/07/31/news-opinion/united-states/state-dept-report-describes-rising-tide-of-anti-semitism#ixzz2v2pU5tNw
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Wee are all able to do a little bit of research. Even hundreds of years.

What experience do you have, that the rest of us do not

Is US military experience greater than Canadian

Why so

I have explained that over the years.. even at the beginning of his multi-thread debate..

I have family there..

I have been in business with a Russian and worked extensively out of a Russian owned shipyard in Elizabeth New Jersey.

as for the military.. .. I imagine if a Canadian had a chance to be on a Russian cruiser.. he would take it.. just to see how they really are at sea..

I was one of the refs' assigned to the Soviet cruiser Marshal Ustinov, during the first joint navel exercises between the US and Russia..
somewhere in my military stuff I have three medals from them.. along with a bunch of stuff I traded $ for..
they hand them out for about everything.. thinking a trinket will improve moral..


when you do business with and go nose to nose with Russians.. you either lose your @$$ or you learn alot about them..

and for some reason we have alot of the citizens from the breakaways living here..

I actually enjoy doing business with them.. if they respect you,. they quickly welcome you into their company ...

It was funny pulling up with my truck and trailer to the port.. seeing a line a half mile long.. most parked for the whole evening.. so I would just get in line.. but I didn't wait like they did..

knowing the process.. I parked and went to deal with the paperwork..

as soon as I finished paperwork,... I would be told I didn't have to wait.. they would unload me right away.. then we would look at all the cool stuff getting shipped.. drag racing cars.. Bentleys' boats,.. ect..

he even took me down for coffee in the Bentley. all while everyone else waited..

I have alot of stories..

so yes.. I would say I understand both sides.. and it isn't about the Russian people.. it is about the former soviet government wanting to recover the super power status.. and keep their NG flowing so they can fund it..
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Steve said:
it is about the former soviet government wanting to recover the super power status.. and keep their NG flowing so they can fund it..

Russia and the US are doing the exact same thing.

both have given Ukraine aid packages to entice them

Barry was using the same tactics he used in Egypt to intervene in Ukrainian government

Russia has finally had enough of Barrys arab springs and is reasserting some of his own power
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Steve said:
it is about the former soviet government wanting to recover the super power status.. and keep their NG flowing so they can fund it..

Russia and the US are doing the exact same thing.

both have given Ukraine aid packages to entice them

Barry was using the same tactics he used in Egypt to intervene in Ukrainian government

Russia has finally had enough of Barrys arab springs and is reasserting some of his own power

should I argue that same point when Russia takes more then half of the Arctic from Canada?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Steve said:
hypocritexposer said:
Steve said:
it is about the former soviet government wanting to recover the super power status.. and keep their NG flowing so they can fund it..

Russia and the US are doing the exact same thing.

both have given Ukraine aid packages to entice them

Barry was using the same tactics he used in Egypt to intervene in Ukrainian government

Russia has finally had enough of Barrys arab springs and is reasserting some of his own power

should I argue that same point when Russia takes more then half of the Arctic from Canada?

or when the US takes over part of Cuba
 
Top