|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 1, 2013 20:51:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 2, 2013 6:36:14 GMT -8
No matter what your view is or where you lean politically, more and more folks are seeing the Obama Administration as a rudderless ship. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Sept 2, 2013 7:33:38 GMT -8
I like the fact that he has backed off. I think it shows respect for our Constitution. I don't think many want another war in the Middle East. This shows that he is not a dictator, but a President who has to answer to the American people.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 2, 2013 8:38:32 GMT -8
I like the fact that he has backed off. I think it shows respect for our Constitution. I don't think many want another war in the Middle East. This shows that he is not a dictator, but a President who has to answer to the American people. Fair enough, but Oblama's meandering policies are a problem. The fact that we are considering military action at all is a result of his careless "red line" statement of 2012. The man is simply out of his depth with respect to foreign policy. It appears that even many liberals and erstwhile Obama supporters are beginning to see the facts. And let's remember that he still has three and a half years left in office. Too bad BHO does not have somebody of the stature of a Henry Kissinger on board to guide him in these crucial matters. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 2, 2013 10:09:28 GMT -8
I think that Obama's foreign relations problems are twofold. First, he has (or had) an exaggerated view of his capability to convince foreign leaders to see things his way. Apparently, he was unaware that national leaders are pretty much immune to the personality of other leaders. They are, of course, not immune to overwhelming miltiary power, provided that they are convinced that he who controls that power (i.e., the POTUS) is quite prepared to use it.
Personalities such as Putin and Assad have serious priorities that they will not throw aside because the U.S. President has a nice smile and an outstretched hand. Example: the Russia "reset," which must go down as one of history' most naive gambits.
Second, Obama really does seem uncomfortable with the fact that the U.S.A. has been the dominant world power since 1945. I can understand one's desire to be more circumspect in wielding that power; for example, in the future it may well be unwise to resort to actions such as the 1953 Iranian coups.
On the other hand, there is a price to be paid when the dominant power decides to "lead from behind." Leading from behind is another way of saying, Go ahead and do what you want, we will under no circumstances react, even if you threaten our vital national interests. Much better to have leaders of hostile nations think long and hard before poking Uncle Sam in the eye. As things stand now, it's pretty obvious that those leaders have concluded that Obama is a naive fool who will do nothing to stand in their way.
This day after day dithering over what, if anything, to do about Syria furthers that assumption on the part of Assad, Putin, the Iranians, etc. Obama obviously does not have his heart invested in the Syria issue. If he hesitates to take action in this case (one which the U.S. could handle decisively in a matter of hours or at most a few days), why would the Iranians think that he would undertake the much more difficult task of destroying their nuclear weapons program?
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 2, 2013 11:12:03 GMT -8
I like the fact that he has backed off. I think it shows respect for our Constitution. I don't think many want another war in the Middle East. This shows that he is not a dictator, but a President who has to answer to the American people. I think most folks are glad that he has backed off. The reasons are far from what your gullible little mind thinks. He has no depth of character or ability to reason and has no one around him with much more ability. He is in a quandary of his own making and has no idea of what to do. Now he says he has the authority to go ahead on his own but wants Congressional approval. What will he do if he can't get the vote? This is a guy who is about two levels above his ability in terms of " The Peter Principle". |
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Sept 2, 2013 11:19:53 GMT -8
The reasons are far from what your gullible little mind thinks. He has no depth of character or ability to reason and has no one around him with much more ability. He is in a quandary of his own making and has no idea of what to do. This is honestly the funniest thing I've seen today. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 2, 2013 12:31:34 GMT -8
The reasons are far from what your gullible little mind thinks. He has no depth of character or ability to reason and has no one around him with much more ability. He is in a quandary of his own making and has no idea of what to do. This is honestly the funniest thing I've seen today. It is far beyond funny. It is sad beyond belief. |
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Sept 2, 2013 13:01:45 GMT -8
This is honestly the funniest thing I've seen today. It is far beyond funny. It is sad beyond belief. I suppose you're right, in a way. |
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Sept 2, 2013 14:51:56 GMT -8
I like the fact that he has backed off. I think it shows respect for our Constitution. I don't think many want another war in the Middle East. This shows that he is not a dictator, but a President who has to answer to the American people. Probably should have thought about the constitution when he made the empty threat and hurt his/our commitment to follow through on our pronouncements. SMH. Sent from my DROID RAZR using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Sept 2, 2013 15:06:11 GMT -8
Just saw an interview with a young, Republican House member on CNN.
Said since the Prez already made a "red-line" comment, America's "credibility" is at stake, so military action is necessary.
Thought about the debt ceiling debates, and had a good chuckle.
|
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Sept 3, 2013 1:16:42 GMT -8
Just saw an interview with a young, Republican House member on CNN. Said since the Prez already made a "red-line" comment, America's "credibility" is at stake, so military action is necessary. Thought about the debt ceiling debates, and had a good chuckle. That 'con is as wrong as the President was when he made the empty pronouncement. Some of the things floated by the White House this weekend were laughable, starting with the notion of a "largely symbolic" strike to send a message. Really? What kind of message would a preannounced symbolic strike gain? Of course, there would be enough time time to put women and children in key symbolic locations... Sent from my DROID RAZR using proboards |
|
