Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    2:14 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Putin to America: You're not special Back to Topics
RNorm

Champion Author
San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 12, 2013 8:10:01 AM

"It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation,"
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,125
Points:3,446,720
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 21, 2013 12:05:26 AM

There's an old saying in Russian that, when translated goes something like:

"There's no truth in PRAVDA, and no news in IZVESTIA"

(Pravda is the old Communist party daily newspaper. The name means, literally, "truth". IZVESTIA was the Soviet GOVERNMENT newspaper. It's name literally means "news". Not sure if Izvestia is still published. It may very well not be. I've read both in their original languages.."
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 10:45:59 AM

"It doesn't matter. You said it COULDN'T happen. The order of magnitude in which it DID happen is irrelevant. "


Um, and you said:

"As expected, John McCain, an American Politician, wrote an Op-Ed in a Russian paper, more widely circulated than "The Moscow Times" (c. 35k in a country of 145M - ROTFLMAO), criticizing Vlad or the Russian state."

Which isn't actually what happened either, since we're being so technical...so there's some irrelevancy there on your side of the line...

*wink*


Profile Pic
modeshoo825
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:2,530
Points:51,080
Joined:Sep 2007
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 10:17:27 AM

It doesn't matter. You said it COULDN'T happen. The order of magnitude in which it DID happen is irrelevant.

Putin is either lying, or he's been in isolation for the past few days. While the original op-ed only appeared on pravda.ru, the rest of the world including your "The Moscow Times", is writing about it, talking about it, and quoting it. Millions of Russians, no matter how shut off from the rest of the world you think they are, are hearing and reading about it.
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 8:08:31 AM

"By appearing on pravda.ru, McCain's op-ed will reach at least as many Russians as if it had been printed in "The Moscow Times" (the publication RNorm cited to disprove two "points" he made earlier)"


Yeah:

"Pravda.ru, the news outlet that actually published McCain’s piece, is an electronic news website founded in 1999. Even though the website also bears the name Pravda, it is not connected to Pravda newspaper. The website has English and Russian editions and covers everything from politics to fashion and celebrities.

While editors at the communist Pravda publication said last week they were not going to accept an op-ed by McCain, a spokesman for the senator said McCain submitted one anyway, in addition to Pravda.ru, since there was confusion over the two different Pravdas. As expected, it was not published by the newspaper."


Putin said Thursday in a press conference he was not aware of McCain’s opinion piece about Russia.
Profile Pic
modeshoo825
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:2,530
Points:51,080
Joined:Sep 2007
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 7:28:01 AM

By appearing on pravda.ru, McCain's op-ed will reach at least as many Russians as if it had been printed in "The Moscow Times" (the publication RNorm cited to disprove two "points" he made earlier):

(1) "Obama, or any other American politician could not write an op-ed in The Moscow Times criticizing Vlad or the Russian State..."

(2) "The Moscow Times" is to "Pravda" as "The New York Times" is to "The New York Post".

...and for what it's worth, even"The Moscow Times", has an article about, which includes quotes from, McCain's "Pravda" op-ed that are critical of Putin and the Russian government.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,918
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 5:49:29 PM

"Sooo..... what's your point?"

My point is that some (maybe many) folks think the internet website Pravda and the printed Pravda are one in the same, and they aren't. The point should have been apparent from reading my post.

Should our Senators be wasting time writing pointless articles to one-up Putin? I should think there are far more important matters to tend to.


[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 9/19/2013 5:51:58 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,671
Points:3,770,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 5:19:05 PM

"So paying college athletes is a bigger story/topic then the Putin/Obama Syria negotiations? "

Yeah, to the average reader, it is.
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 5:16:09 PM

"Sooo..... what's your point? Is it that mother Russia only censors print media????"


I think the point was that unlike us, Mother Russia is not as digitized as the USA and therefore, Johnny's article may have not had a large a reach as thought or hoped...

But still, I believe its a first, so go Johnboy!
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,020
Points:2,313,260
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 4:57:35 PM

Marty: <<<"and not in the print Pravda">>>

--Is there even any more "print" media???? I don't get the NY Times, I read the internet website version. Sooo..... what's your point? Is it that mother Russia only censors print media????
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,918
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 3:13:48 PM

Actually, Johnny's article appeared on the internet website Pravda, and not in the print Pravda (which are completely unrelated except for the name.)
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 12:44:01 PM

<<<Or perhaps they want to sell more magazines? >>>

So paying college athletes is a bigger story/topic then the Putin/Obama Syria negotiations? College footballers getting paid would sell more mags and is a biggr story here then Putin taking our prez to school? I respectfully disagree.

Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 8:00:34 AM

"As expected, John McCain, an American Politician, wrote an Op-Ed in a Russian paper, more widely circulated than "The Moscow Times" (c. 35k in a country of 145M - ROTFLMAO), criticizing Vlad or the Russian state."


Well hush my mouth...Ok Johnny! Now to watch to see who is jailed for this...
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,073
Points:2,981,920
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 7:58:36 AM

"I find it interesting how the rest of the world gets to see Putin victorious on the cover of TIME magazine, and here in the United States we get a cover about whether college athletes get paid. Perhaps TIME is trying to protect President Obama's reputation here."

Or perhaps they want to sell more magazines?
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 7:58:03 AM

Has this guy been reading my posts?


"Until the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs, the administration was not primarily concerned with chemical weapons. It was concerned with doing whatever it could — short of intervening militarily — to see to it that Syrian President Bashar Assad either step down or be forced out. In 2011, Obama said: “For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside.” And, a year later: “I have indicated repeatedly that President al-Assad has lost legitimacy, that he needs to step down.” And in May at a news conference with the Turkish prime minister: “We both agree that Assad needs to go. ... That is the only way we’re going to resolve this crisis. And we’re going to keep working for a Syria that is free from Assad’s tyranny.”

That goal is now dead. The new Putin-Obama compact is a boon to Assad in that it brings him into the so-called international community America has spent the last two years trying to kick him out of. This “represents an astonishing victory for the Assad regime,” writes Bloomberg’s Jeffrey Goldberg (no relation). So long as Assad only massacres his own people — including children — with old-fashioned weapons, he’s immune to international force. Worse, Assad is now our partner because getting his WMD is now more important than getting rid of him. We’ve gone from siding with the rebels to acting like a boxing ref with no investment in who wins so long as neither side strikes any low blows."

The sad thing is Kerry and the prez don't even have a clue that the fox has been inside the coop and ate all the chickens.
Profile Pic
modeshoo825
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:2,530
Points:51,080
Joined:Sep 2007
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2013 7:51:44 AM

"Indeed, in the CONTEXT (which you continue to overlook), Obama, or any other American politician could not write an op-ed in The Moscow Times criticizing Vlad or the Russian State..."

As expected, John McCain, an American Politician, wrote an Op-Ed in a Russian paper, more widely circulated than "The Moscow Times" (c. 35k in a country of 145M - ROTFLMAO), criticizing Vlad or the Russian state.

Russian Translation

English Translation

Profile Pic
RAB2010
All-Star Author Kalamazoo

Posts:649
Points:77,710
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 11:58:17 AM

The by-line is inaccurate. Putin did not tell America that they are not special. What Putin said was that, as soon as one group of people begin thinking they are better than everyone else, trouble is coming down the road. America, unfortunately, has become an example of this. Much to the embarrassment of America's patriots.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 11:14:33 AM

tr: "Perhaps TIME is trying to protect President Obama's reputation here."


Very interesting. And who says that the MSM isn't in Obama's back pocket?

Time Magazine Hides Putin's Success from U.S. Voters


mudtoe
Profile Pic
therder
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:3,532
Points:2,199,070
Joined:Feb 2007
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 11:10:10 AM

I find it interesting how the rest of the world gets to see Putin victorious on the cover of TIME magazine, and here in the United States we get a cover about whether college athletes get paid. Perhaps TIME is trying to protect President Obama's reputation here.
Profile Pic
modeshoo825
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:2,530
Points:51,080
Joined:Sep 2007
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 10:58:02 AM

airfresh: "They don't need to be afraid. Mr Obama had his chance to lead and he did what he has done on most every other issue in his presidency. Vote present."

Bingo and boom.

But let us focus our outrage on Putin's comment in response to 0bama's rhetorical use of the term "exceptional" and, at the same time, disregard 0bama's inability and / or unwillingness to take the lead on Syria.

Putin: Mission Accomplished.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 10:42:33 AM

af: "And... the obsession with chemical weapons at the exclusion of conventional allows Assad and Vlad to cement the regime and allows Vlad to continue to arm his buddy so he can continue to slaughter 10's and 100's of thousands of his own citizens."


That's in essence the deal. Assad promises to give up his chemical weapons in return for a free hand and help from Putin in dealing with his opponents, without fear of the US getting involved. Nice deal. Also, does anyone really believe Assad is going to give up ALL of his chemical weapons? He's going to play the same shell game with the inspectors that Saddam Hussein and Iran did for years, kicking them out sometimes, letting them back in but restricting their movements, then kicking them out again.... etc. All the while he will be replacing whatever token weapons he had to give up.

Also, the last time I read the about the agreement, which is supposed to eventually be approved by the UN, there was no mention of the authorization for the use of force if he doesn't give up all his chemical weapons. So it appears that Assad gets an unconditional guarantee of no US military intervention no matter what he does.

As I posted earlier, I would have dearly loved to sell Obama and Kerry a used car.


mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/18/2013 10:43:21 AM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,349
Points:827,710
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 9:29:06 AM

Sad that it took an op-ed in the NYT to wake up some liberals to Obama's foreign policy inadequacies. I wonder if we have someone who can put an op-ed in Pravda for our domestic policy problems?
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 9:10:51 AM

<<<And no matter how much you slice, dice, run or hide, you can't ignore the fact that Assad IS concerned about the US threat (which should never be taken off the table)...>>>

Vlad has taken the measure of us and has come up to the same conclusion as the writer in my last post. There are reports of WMD being moved all over the place. It will be weeks or months before anyone is in there with any semblance of know how to examine them. It's already been weeks for Assad to move hide and otherwise obfuscate the issue.

And... the obsession with chemical weapons at the exclusion of conventional allows Assad and Vlad to cement the regime and allows Vlad to continue to arm his buddy so he can continue to slaughter 10's and 100's of thousands of his own citizens. Which is the only issue of importance to them. They don't need chemical weapons to do that. A tepid world response focused only on chemical weapons works just fine. The presidents policy of leading from behind is very evident here. Just read the words... leading from behind.


They don't need to be afraid. Mr Obama had his chance to lead and he did what he has done on most every other issue in his presidency. Vote present.

[Edited by: airfresh at 9/18/2013 9:16:51 AM EST]
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 8:54:35 AM

From an op-ed peice in the paper today from a liberal writer describing our handling of the WMD's in Syria...."The policeman has proved to be a bumbler. He is unschooled in foreign policy. Rogues and killers have taken the measure of him. He is smaller than first appeared."
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,125
Points:3,446,720
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 11:45:08 PM

I wonder if Vlad Putin was going to suggest that Russia (the former Soviet Union) as also "not special". Or are they "special", "just 'cause.."?
Profile Pic
NothingNew
Rookie Author Rockford

Posts:77
Points:1,080
Joined:Aug 2013
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 9:18:11 PM

Someone needs to remind Putin that it was his country that held millions of Europeans as prisoners for almost 45 years. And that it is HIS country that is now a Mafia state. And that his buddy Mogilovich sent Victor Bout around the world selling WMDs to every despotic tyrant that the world coughed up like hairballs. And that his country used a sarin pellet to murder a political foe. And his buddies used poison to disfigure and almost kill a political foe. That his country locks up and disenfranchises homosexuals.

Putin has NOTHING to brag about. He is a viscous little dictator that likes to pose for pictures that would make the cover of any gay magazine in the world.

I wonder if he will ever come out of the closet so we can have some real fun with him.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,662
Points:2,041,465
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 8:47:32 PM

RNorm said: "That is actually what Vlad is hoping for, so he can stifle his only real adversary, Obama"

Obozo has proven himself to be a fool many times over. He is nowhere close to being an adversary of Putin's, other than the fact that the post turtle is supposedly leading the world's greatest nation. Putin knows it, Obozo knows it...everybody knows it!

Obozo is simply a man of empty words and promises. His incompetency has been displayed umpteen times now with his countless failures. If he's Putin's "adversary", he's certainly not what you'd call a "worthy" adversary. It's like Boris Spassky sitting down for a game of chess with Lindsey Lohan: just a tad bit lopsided!
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 6:00:10 PM

RN: "That's the whole point. Everyone else did and saying they're not bound to it as cover to ignore it indeed punkish."


So this treaty (is it an official treaty?) requires those who sign it to take military action against those who don't and use poison gas? Please post the section of the document describing this obligation.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 4:54:16 PM

"Syria didn't sign it."

That's the whole point. Everyone else did and saying they're not bound to it as cover to ignore it indeed punkish.







"Additionally, Obama's remarks about the "redline" were specific to the US. No matter how you slice, dice, run or hide, you can't make that statement go away, and neither can our dear leader, no matter how hard he tries."

I'm not trying to make it go away. IF it were the prez I'd have a contingency plan and would launch the missles (since he's stated he doesn't need congressional authority anyway). For it WAS the threat of military force that got Vlad and Assad to figure out a way for Vlad to keep selling arms to Assad and Assad not have the real threat of cruise missles raining on his chemical facilities.

And no matter how much you slice, dice, run or hide, you can't ignore the fact that Assad IS concerned about the US threat (which should never be taken off the table)...

Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 4:50:21 PM

"Not what I was referring to. It was Obama who drew the moving red lines in Syria. The agreement in 97 wasn't specific to Assad and Syria while Mr Obama was. But if you want to split hairs by all means."


Not really splitting hairs, but since I'm looking at this from a larger scope, I DO look at the line the world drew when the majority of the countries on the planet became signatories to the 97 Agreement. The Agreement in 97 was against the use of the same chemical agents used recently in Syria, so in my mind it does apply and the world should not be so punkish as to not enforce its own agreements; or they should just disband the UN and it becomes every man for themselves (which basically it is already).





"We can agree on that point. We all should see through the charade. We'll see if that proves true.

But we all don't because most are only focusing on how this (and every other issue can be framed in an anti-obama lens. That is silly, but it is what it is. That is actually what Vlad is hoping for, so he can stifle his only real adversary, Obama, and continue to solidify his grasp on other areas on the planet to put Russia back on the world stage as a superpower (which now it isn't). This is really the same strategy used by another guy back in the 30s and 40's who made pacts with countries and then after he conquered their friends and allies, turned himself on the pact makers too...THEN they called on their "friends" across the waters for help; INCLUDING mother russia. Its sad how quickly so many forget history because they perspective is short sited and blindingly partisan.




"As usual... we're not as far apart as it may first appear ;)"

Generally, reasonable people can find common ground....


Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 4:44:07 PM

RN: "No, it was all of the signatories to the ban on the use of Chemical Weapons that drew that line....way back in 1997. "


Syria didn't sign it. Additionally, Obama's remarks about the "redline" were specific to the US. No matter how you slice, dice, run or hide, you can't make that statement go away, and neither can our dear leader, no matter how hard he tries.



mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/17/2013 4:46:22 PM EST]
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 4:34:53 PM

<<<Or, in your mind, being a signatory to such agreements means nothing at all...I guess we should start applying that mindset to NATO and every other agreement that we're signatories to...>>>

Not what I was referring to. It was Obama who drew the moving red lines in Syria. The agreement in 97 wasn't specific to Assad and Syria while Mr Obama was. But if you want to split hairs by all means.

<<<No we shouldn't just ignore the use of sarin; regardless of who's doing it. It was a grave mistake when the world ignored Rwanda and it would be even worse to do the same now. Putin isn't stupid and we ALL should see through his pseudo diplomacy and recognize that he has specific ulterior motives that will help spread the russian velvet glove far beyond mother Russia...>>>

We can agree on that point. We all should see through the charade. We'll see if that proves true.As usual... we're not as far apart as it may first appear ;)


[Edited by: airfresh at 9/17/2013 4:39:26 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 3:48:09 PM

"But I believe that is a lesser issue then what would happen if we do as Putin would have us. Putin and Assad are a couple of pretty sinister cats. Putins desire is definitely to spread his influence in the middle east where he already has considerable influence with Iran and Syria. Two regimes that definitely pose some serious threats to our own national security shoud either or both gain in military strength and weaponry. Something Putin would be happy to supply. The article I linked to likened this to a new kind of cold war and I believe we may be in a very critical stage of it."

Yeah, we're there now, and how we address this will be pivotal to how the new cold front is waged.

"Should we wash our hands of this now and pass it off to the UN it could be a grave mistake. I don't worship Putin as someone implied. I believe he has sinister intent and I see him dancing circles around a very timid and reluctant administration."

No we shouldn't just ignore the use of sarin; regardless of who's doing it. It was a grave mistake when the world ignored Rwanda and it would be even worse to do the same now. Putin isn't stupid and we ALL should see through his pseudo diplomacy and recognize that he has specific ulterior motives that will help spread the russian velvet glove far beyond mother Russia...
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 3:44:55 PM

"It was Obama himself, not the world, that drew the red line. "

No, it was all of the signatories to the ban on the use of Chemical Weapons that drew that line....way back in 1997.

Or, in your mind, being a signatory to such agreements means nothing at all...I guess we should start applying that mindset to NATO and every other agreement that we're signatories to...

Gotcha.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 3:18:06 PM

<<<When Bush did just that, the right was behind him and the left (generally) complained. Now that Obama suggests the same its the reverse (generally speaking).>>>

There are major differences in the scope and scale of what each was proposing. Way too many distinctions to list here.

But your more general point of Congress reversing itself depending on who is president that is pretty consistent within each party. We agree on that.

<<<Such partisanship diminishes our global influence and people don't realize that while they're attacking the president like they're gleefully doing now and lining up behind (or alongside) Vlad, they're also attacking themselves. >>>

"like they're gleefully doing now"? We could have a single topic devoted to examples of both sides attacking a president unmercifully for partisan reasons and it would be the most prolific topic on gasbuddy within a short period of time. Just the two of us giving examples of the other side ;)

I completely understand where you're coming from though. It didn't serve our interests in the 8 years prior to Obama and it doesn't serve our interests now.

But I believe that is a lesser issue then what would happen if we do as Putin would have us. Putin and Assad are a couple of pretty sinister cats. Putins desire is definitely to spread his influence in the middle east where he already has considerable influence with Iran and Syria. Two regimes that definitely pose some serious threats to our own national security shoud either or both gain in military strength and weaponry. Something Putin would be happy to supply. The article I linked to likened this to a new kind of cold war and I believe we may be in a very critical stage of it.

Should we wash our hands of this now and pass it off to the UN it could be a grave mistake. I don't worship Putin as someone implied. I believe he has sinister intent and I see him dancing circles around a very timid and reluctant administration.

Just because I may agree with much of Putin's assessment doesn't mean I like the man. But I can see us making some strategic mistakes that will haunt us in the future.


[Edited by: airfresh at 9/17/2013 3:20:57 PM EST]
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 2:59:12 PM

RN: "One thing that you righties love to ignore is that Obama pointed out how the WORLD has spoken on using Chemical Weapons, but yet the world lacks the will to enforce its own agreements."


It was Obama himself, not the world, that drew the red line. He's the only one who lacked the will to enforce his, uh, bellicose campaign threat. Unfortunately the credibility of the United States takes a hit along with his. It would require a Ronald Reagan years to undo the damage Obama has done to the reputation of the United States, like what he did to repair the damage done to the United States' reputation by Jimmy Carter. Unfortunately, I don't think we have one waiting in the wings this time.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 2:46:44 PM

"If we relinquish our right to use force to UN agreements and oversight I believe we will also give up our ability to be that powerful beacon as you posted. We then will simply get behind those others is silence awaiting the UN to do what it has proven over and over again that it has no will, power or desire to do."


Here's the problem.

When Bush did just that, the right was behind him and the left (generally) complained. Now that Obama suggests the same its the reverse (generally speaking).

Such partisanship diminishes our global influence and people don't realize that while they're attacking the president like they're gleefully doing now and lining up behind (or alongside) Vlad, they're also attacking themselves.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 2:03:15 PM

<<<One thing that you righties love to ignore is that Obama pointed out how the WORLD has spoken on using Chemical Weapons, but yet the world lacks the will to enforce its own agreements.>>>

Actually Mr Obama has been out front speaking against their use. Not much from "the world" really. But you're dead on about "the world" having no will to enforce it's own agreements. And let's define "the world"... the UN.

<<<So what America needs to consider is whether or not global agreements and pacts mean anything (because it seems they don't)>>>

If you mean the UN I totally agree. They mean nothing to those who are the subject of those agreements. Too many to list.

<<<will America continue to be "the powerful beacon to all those who strive for liberty and seek democratic self-government" that it has been, or join the world in silence when atrocities happen. >>>

That's a very thoughtful question that deserves an honest debate.

If we relinquish our right to use force to UN agreements and oversight I believe we will also give up our ability to be that powerful beacon as you posted. We then will simply get behind those others is silence awaiting the UN to do what it has proven over and over again that it has no will, power or desire to do.

[Edited by: airfresh at 9/17/2013 2:06:07 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 1:31:06 PM

"Then consider what's happened in Syria, and all the similar things in store for us in the future as the price of your priorities."


I've considered what's happening there.

One thing that you righties love to ignore is that Obama pointed out how the WORLD has spoken on using Chemical Weapons, but yet the world lacks the will to enforce its own agreements.

So what America needs to consider is whether or not global agreements and pacts mean anything (because it seems they don't) AND will America continue to be "the powerful beacon to all those who strive for liberty and seek democratic self-government" that it has been, or join the world in silence when atrocities happen.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 1:25:36 PM

RN: "One just has to have their priorities in the right place. "


Then consider what's happened in Syria, and all the similar things in store for us in the future as the price of your priorities.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 12:38:00 PM

"The body of posts here on GB are full of your ideological buddies bemoaning military spending and expressing their wish to eviscerate the military so that there is more money with which to bribe people via government freebies in order to secure their votes."



Because we don't need to be spending more than the next 10-15 nations COMBINED to have a strong military when there are starving people in this country; common sense should tell you that.

And again, you can have a strong military, not be the world's policeman, fix schools, roads, bridges and the rest of our infrastructure AND help the poor without going broke.

One just has to have their priorities in the right place.

SMH
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 12:34:03 PM

RN: "Nobody is trying to dismantle anything."


The body of posts here on GB are full of your ideological buddies bemoaning military spending and expressing their wish to eviscerate the military so that there is more money with which to bribe people via government freebies in order to secure their votes.


mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/17/2013 12:34:37 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 12:26:36 PM

"For those on the left who seek to dismantle our military, I submit this whole incident as just a first example of what's in store for us going forward. I also note that this occurred while we still actually have the potential to act, but is a result of our leaders simply projecting weakness. Just think about how much worse it's going to be when we actually lack the power to act and not merely lack the will to act."


Nobody is trying to dismantle anything.

What we need to do is stop having bases all over the planet, focus on strengthening our OWN country and military strengths (and that doesn't mean you need to have more soldiers all over the globe either).

Dude, this is 2013, not 1913. Bigger isn't better; smarter and more technologically advanced is.

A smart guy like you SHOULD know that...but I guess the ODS is blinding you.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,832
Points:1,875,640
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 12:18:33 PM

For those on the left who seek to dismantle our military, I submit this whole incident as just a first example of what's in store for us going forward. I also note that this occurred while we still actually have the military power to act, but is a result of our leaders simply projecting weakness. Just think about how much worse it's going to be when we actually lack the power to act and not merely lack the will to act.


mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/17/2013 12:21:37 PM EST]
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,020
Points:2,313,260
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 10:59:22 AM

Norm: <<<"But the "Putin Doctrine" doesn't apply to russian internal conflicts...Just ask Georgians and Chechens...">>>

--Exactly, just as exceptionalism doesn't apply to American "you didn't build that" entrepreneurs.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 10:56:05 AM

You're right Norm but it isn't funny. It also doesn't apply any more to Syrian citizens either. No laughing matter IMO. While he is allowed to continue to exert influence in the middle east. He's no dummy.

By Obama and Kerry tying us only to chemical weapons in our righteousw indignation... Bashar and Putin can conventionally kill as many as they need to in order to stay in power.

He's eating our lunch diplomatically.

[Edited by: airfresh at 9/17/2013 11:02:05 AM EST]
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:53,063
Points:1,266,575
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 10:53:14 AM

""The recent op-ed article by Putin in The New York Times introduces the Putin Doctrine, which shrewdly calls for the peaceful resolution of conflicts and opposes any outside intervention in civil wars without the U.N. Security Council’s approval. It presents Russia as the guardian angel of international law and order."


*ROTFL*

But the "Putin Doctrine" doesn't apply to russian internal conflicts...Just ask Georgians and Chechens...

SMH
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 10:48:21 AM

He's been speaking to a world stage. He's a former KGB. He knows how the game works and so far he's been taking our president to school.


I posted this in another topic. An interesting read sgm"The recent op-ed article by Putin in The New York Times introduces the Putin Doctrine, which shrewdly calls for the peaceful resolution of conflicts and opposes any outside intervention in civil wars without the U.N. Security Council’s approval. It presents Russia as the guardian angel of international law and order.

Putin also directs a spotlight on the United States to which “military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace.”

Yet, in reality, it is Russia, which has enabled Bashar Assad to butcher more than 100,000 Syrian citizens by supplying Syria with lethal weapons and other military equipment to suppress the uprising. Without Russia’s active support, the Assad ruling family would have been long gone."

If he's successful he will effectively tie our hands with UN rope while he is able to do whatever he wishes behind the scenes.


[Edited by: airfresh at 9/17/2013 10:55:16 AM EST]
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,073
Points:2,981,920
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 10:41:28 AM

Why would Putin think anyone would listen to him about our exceptionalism? He's just bitter, because he knows we really are the exceptional nation.
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,434
Points:560,315
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 9:20:46 AM

"Can you guys please get a room???"

My treat.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,671
Points:3,770,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 9:17:37 AM

Putin is a punk@$$ bully dictator trying to stir up more controversy among the American people. He was very successful primarily because that left wing bird cage liner of the NY media gave him space to vent.
Post a reply Back to Topics