• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama At The UN One Year Ago

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
september, 2011, he was beaming, the entire arab world abloom

"we've set a new direction, we are poised to end these wars from a position of strength, we have reason to hope, this year has been a time of extraordinary transformation"

he was looking beyond---to syria, to palestine and almost to iran

One year ago, Egypt had known one President for nearly 30 years. But for 18 days, the eyes of the world were glued to Tahrir Square, where Egyptians from all walks of life -- men and women, young and old, Muslim and Christian -- demanded their universal rights. We saw in those protesters the moral force of non-violence that has lit the world from Delhi to Warsaw, from Selma to South Africa -- and we knew that change had come to Egypt and to the Arab world.

One year ago, the people of Libya were ruled by the world’s longest-serving dictator. But faced with bullets and bombs and a dictator who threatened to hunt them down like rats, they showed relentless bravery. We will never forget the words of the Libyan who stood up in those early days of the revolution and said, “Our words are free now.” It’s a feeling you can’t explain. Day after day, in the face of bullets and bombs, the Libyan people refused to give back that freedom. And when they were threatened by the kind of mass atrocity that often went unchallenged in the last century, the United Nations lived up to its charter. The Security Council authorized all necessary measures to prevent a massacre. The League called for this effort; Arab nations joined a NATO-led coalition that halted Qaddafi’s forces in their tracks.

In the months that followed, the will of the coalition proved unbreakable, and the will of the Libyan people could not be denied. Forty-two years of tyranny was ended in six months. From Tripoli to Misurata to Benghazi -- today, Libya is free. Yesterday, the leaders of a new Libya took their rightful place beside us, and this week, the United States is reopening our embassy in Tripoli

So this has been a remarkable year. The Qaddafi regime is over. Gbagbo, Ben Ali, Mubarak are no longer in power. Osama bin Laden is gone, and the idea that change could only come through violence has been buried with him. Something is happening in our world. The way things have been is not the way that they will be. The humiliating grip of corruption and tyranny is being pried open. Dictators are on notice. Technology is putting power into the hands of the people. The youth are delivering a powerful rebuke to dictatorship, and rejecting the lie that some races, some peoples, some religions, some ethnicities do not desire democracy. The promise written down on paper -- “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” -- is closer at hand.

In Iran, we've seen a government that refuses to recognize the rights of its own people. As we meet here today, men and women and children are being tortured, detained and murdered by the Syrian regime. Thousands have been killed, many during the holy time of Ramadan. Thousands more have poured across Syria’s borders. The Syrian people have shown dignity and courage in their pursuit of justice -- protesting peacefully, standing silently in the streets, dying for the same values that this institution is supposed to stand for. And the question for us is clear: Will we stand with the Syrian people, or with their oppressors?

One year ago, I stood at this podium and I called for an independent Palestine. I believed then, and I believe now, that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own. But what I also said is that a genuine peace can only be realized between the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves. One year later, despite extensive efforts by America and others, the parties have not bridged their differences. Faced with this stalemate, I put forward a new basis for negotiations in May of this year. That basis is clear. It’s well known to all of us here. Israelis must know that any agreement provides assurances for their security. Palestinians deserve to know the territorial basis of their state.

Now, I know that many are frustrated by the lack of progress. I assure you, so am I. But the question isn’t the goal that we seek -- the question is how do we reach that goal. And I am convinced that there is no short cut to the end of a conflict that has endured for decades. Peace is hard work. Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations -- if it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians -- not us –- who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and on security, on refugees and Jerusalem.

Remarks by President Obama in Address to the United Nations General Assembly | The White House

turns out washington aint the only place you can't change from the inside

what a difference a year makes
 
Last edited:
President Obama was right last year and he's right this year: the region has undergone a huge change away from dictatorship and towards democracy, and there will be many bumps along the road.
 
We've been doing Democracy for 230 years or so and looked at how screwed up we are. We're hateful, homicidal and dissatisfied. And we have the richest country in the world as our working base, from sea to shining sea et al.

Egypt and Libya have some learning to do. Shouldn't take more than a few hundred years. They're relatively poor countries with a very limited economic base. One might argue that they NEED a dictator but whatever is happening is what it is.

Most of the ME will always be a nightmare.
 
yesterday obama went on the view (and took a lot of grief for it)

there, he said, unusually wisely, quite out of character:

Obama: Marginalize Anti-Islam Video By Ignoring It - YouTube

TODAY at the un he referenced that vile video no less than eight times

President Obama's speech to the UN general assembly

no one in the world is actively talking about that sophomoric movie trailer more often and louder than barack hussein obama, the celebrator of arab spring

and no one has 1/1000 his audience

he's actually, by now, promoting the damn thing

he has no idea what he's doing
 
President Obama was right last year and he's right this year: the region has undergone a huge change away from dictatorship and towards democracy, and there will be many bumps along the road.

That is so true. People seem to think the US just jumped right into democracy with no bumbs along the road. People really shouldn't expect other countries to deal with change perfectly.
 
"many bumps along the road."

If you are going to defend the President, don't use his direct talking points. It makes you seem like shills.
 
President Obama was right last year and he's right this year: the region has undergone a huge change away from dictatorship and towards democracy, and there will be many bumps along the road.

You apparently don't know much about the Muslim Brotherhood...

There will be no democracy - this will be a theocracy.

It will only be a matter of time before these radical Islamic organizations er political movements settle their minute differences and converge on the US or Israel.

Iran is only waiting on unity and once they get that they will attempt to destroy Israel - Obama may as well have started WWIII....
 
Egypt and Libya have some learning to do. Shouldn't take more than a few hundred years.

Could you translate that into how many ambassadors we'll go through?
 
President Obama was right last year and he's right this year: the region has undergone a huge change away from dictatorship and towards democracy, and there will be many bumps along the road.

Yes, he was completely correct. The problem is that his foreign policy has not matched his rhetoric. His administration has maintained an extremely aloof and uninvolved policy towards the Middle East. It failed to take the lead on Libya (whether or not we bore the lions share of combat responsibility is irrelevant, and perhaps even more damning, since perception is what counts and we had the opportunity to take the political lead and did not), it failed to give a vigorous condemnation after the Saudi intervention in Bahrain (as a result of a complicated fait accompli, but it never the less showed a somewhat insincere lack of leadership to put it politely), juggling our response to Egypt instead of endorsing the street protests and calling for Mubarak to step down as we should have (as we should have done years ago), and now and most importantly for it may prove the most critical in the long run: a complete and utter failure of leadership on Syria.

Regardless of who wins in November, it is imperative that the US stop accepting the comforts of inaction and the watchward of stability, and take a direct leadership role in the Syrian revolution. Assad will fall one way or another, or there will be an internecine civil war, either way the conflict will continue to some sort of conclusion. The US can either have a hand in that outcome, or it can suffer the consequences of the rebels seeking less savory allies and patrons, and seeing what is produced. The timidity emanating from Washington is particularly strange and in-congruent with the clearly delineated positions and obviously more aggressive approaches coming from the Gulf, from Turkey, and from many European states. All that is needed is US leadership, absent that things have ground to a halt.

President Obama should remember his speeches and lead. I sincerely hope he does and that he does an incredible job of it, and I mean that without any facetiousness. We do indeed have the opportunity to continue into the decade from a position of strength, but the fruits of Arab Spring will be half ripe at best, and bitter at worst if the US does not take a more active role in the region.
 
I'm not sure where the idea that somehow Muslims or Arab need several hundred years to acculturate and accept democracy. I don't remember a deep and long history of democracy or a strong font of enlightenment thought emanating from Romania or Croatia, let alone Lithuania or Estonia, or South Korea or Taiwan. Why are the people of Egypt, or Tunisia, or Morocco, or Bahrain for that matter not ready for democracy?
 
You apparently don't know much about the Muslim Brotherhood...

There will be no democracy - this will be a theocracy.

It will only be a matter of time before these radical Islamic organizations er political movements settle their minute differences and converge on the US or Israel.

Iran is only waiting on unity and once they get that they will attempt to destroy Israel - Obama may as well have started WWIII....

The people voted, it's not our place to tell people in other countries who to vote for in their own elections.
 
I'm not sure where the idea that somehow Muslims or Arab need several hundred years to acculturate and accept democracy. I don't remember a deep and long history of democracy or a strong font of enlightenment thought emanating from Romania or Croatia, let alone Lithuania or Estonia, or South Korea or Taiwan. Why are the people of Egypt, or Tunisia, or Morocco, or Bahrain for that matter not ready for democracy?

Democracy is impossible in Sharia controlled governments...

What choice is there under Sharia? It's not exactly like one could elect a liberal Christian or Jew.. Our liberal ideas are the "devil" to most radical Muslims across the Middle East and other parts of Africa, Asia.....

Theocracies always turn out bad - especially when they're hostile to other religions or feel the need to covert the world to their religion or morals/ethics.

I wish we could all just agree to disagree - radical Muslims cannot do that, they slaughter people, decapitate people, stone people, hang people.... Radical/fanatical Muslims are barbarians.

As a Christian we don't put people to death for their sins - at least not in the 21st century, but I cant say the same for radical Islam.
 
Democracy is impossible in Sharia controlled governments...

What choice is there under Sharia? It's not exactly like one could elect a liberal Christian or Jew.. Our liberal ideas are the "devil" to most radical Muslims across the Middle East and other parts of Africa, Asia.....

Theocracies always turn out bad - especially when they're hostile to other religions or feel the need to covert the world to their religion or morals/ethics.

I wish we could all just agree to disagree - radical Muslims cannot do that, they slaughter people, decapitate people, stone people, hang people.... Radical/fanatical Muslims are barbarians.

As a Christian we don't put people to death for their sins - at least not in the 21st century, but I cant say the same for radical Islam.

Sure, which is why I said democracy not theocratic sharia. There is a difference between religion influencing civil society and a civil constitution, and those two things not existing at all. Egypt has been a democracy for all of a few months and thus far it has not plunged into an Islamist abyss. Why not suspend judgement and lend whatever support can reasonably be lent in the meantime.
 
The people voted, it's not our place to tell people in other countries who to vote for in their own elections.

It's not a real democracy and there will never be a real election with opposing candidates... It will pretty much be - Do you want Sharia Law or do you want Sharia Law. How is that democracy?

It would be like putting 5 Pepsi's out on a table and asking which drink they would like - I would assume it would be a Pepsi..
 
It's not a real democracy and there will never be a real election with opposing candidates... It will pretty much be - Do you want Sharia Law or do you want Sharia Law. How is that democracy?

It would be like putting 5 Pepsi's out on a table and asking which drink they would like - I would assume it would be a Pepsi..

It is a nascent democracy, which is probably the most fragile and dangerous form of state that exists in the modern era. However, thus far I'm not sure what you find so objectionable.

Edit: You are aware that there were several candidates for President and several parties competing for Parliament including liberals, moderates, and secularists right?
 
Sure, which is why I said democracy not theocratic sharia. There is a difference between religion influencing civil society and a civil constitution, and those two things not existing at all. Egypt has been a democracy for all of a few months and thus far it has not plunged into an Islamist abyss. Why not suspend judgement and lend whatever support can reasonably be lent in the meantime.

You know who the Godfather of the Muslim Brotherhood is?

Sayyid Qutb

Sayyid Qutb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Muslim Brotherhood is a fanatical religious and extremist organization...

I know what the end result will be - another Iran.
 
You know who the Godfather of the Muslim Brotherhood is?

Sayyid Qutb

Sayyid Qutb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Muslim Brotherhood is a fanatical religious and extremist organization...

I know what the end result will be - another Iran.

I do indeed, I've written several articles about him. I also find it somewhat ironic that you cite Qutb as an example of what will lead to another Iran. Anyways, the Muslim Brotherhood is a diffuse organization with many different currents of opinion and political thought and power. At present Mr. Mursi has done nothing so egregious that it should cause a breach in relations or a lack of faith in the shift towards a democratic Egypt, certainly nothing that would cause the alarm bells of an Islamist take over. The policy at present should be to assist where needed, and to suspend judgement.
 
You know who the Godfather of the Muslim Brotherhood is?

Sayyid Qutb

Sayyid Qutb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Muslim Brotherhood is a fanatical religious and extremist organization...

I know what the end result will be - another Iran.

No, the Musim Brotherhood is not those things. It is a conservative Muslim organization, but they explicitly rejected violence many years ago.
 
It is a nascent democracy, which is probably the most fragile and dangerous form of state that exists in the modern era. However, thus far I'm not sure what you find so objectionable.

Edit: You are aware that there were several candidates for President and several parties competing for Parliament including liberals, moderates, and secularists right?

Oh I understand there were a few candidates who believed in and wanted a western style version of democracy, however western style democracy and values are generally opposed.

Generally speaking non-believers or non-Muslims are viewed as heretics by Muslims - our western lifestyle is immoral. They're generally theocratic lunatics who want "Gods law" or Sharia to be the law of the land - their Bill of Rights is the Qu'ran.

IMO, I stand up for civil liberties and those ideas in the Bill of Rights shouldn't only extend to US citizens.

Funny how if a woman is denied an abortion here, some special interest organizations would go crazy, yet if a woman is stoned in Iran for being raped that same group will rush to defend the Iranian government...

The Muslim Brotherhood wants to stone woman for being raped...
 
No, the Musim Brotherhood is not those things. It is a conservative Muslim organization, but they explicitly rejected violence many years ago.

You actually believe that crap?

You ever hear of Youtube? Try it out... I'm sure livelink has plenty of videos that show the more "brutal side" of the brotherhood such as beheadings.
 
Yes, he was completely correct. The problem is that his foreign policy has not matched his rhetoric. His administration has maintained an extremely aloof and uninvolved policy towards the Middle East. It failed to take the lead on Libya (whether or not we bore the lions share of combat responsibility is irrelevant, and perhaps even more damning, since perception is what counts and we had the opportunity to take the political lead and did not), it failed to give a vigorous condemnation after the Saudi intervention in Bahrain (as a result of a complicated fait accompli, but it never the less showed a somewhat insincere lack of leadership to put it politely), juggling our response to Egypt instead of endorsing the street protests and calling for Mubarak to step down as we should have (as we should have done years ago), and now and most importantly for it may prove the most critical in the long run: a complete and utter failure of leadership on Syria.

Regardless of who wins in November, it is imperative that the US stop accepting the comforts of inaction and the watchward of stability, and take a direct leadership role in the Syrian revolution. Assad will fall one way or another, or there will be an internecine civil war, either way the conflict will continue to some sort of conclusion. The US can either have a hand in that outcome, or it can suffer the consequences of the rebels seeking less savory allies and patrons, and seeing what is produced. The timidity emanating from Washington is particularly strange and in-congruent with the clearly delineated positions and obviously more aggressive approaches coming from the Gulf, from Turkey, and from many European states. All that is needed is US leadership, absent that things have ground to a halt.

President Obama should remember his speeches and lead. I sincerely hope he does and that he does an incredible job of it, and I mean that without any facetiousness. We do indeed have the opportunity to continue into the decade from a position of strength, but the fruits of Arab Spring will be half ripe at best, and bitter at worst if the US does not take a more active role in the region.

You seem to be under the impression that we an afford to be involved in three or more wars simultaneously, but we cannot --- not at this time. I think that Obama played Libya just about perfectly. I agree that he has been unerwhelming in Syria.

I disagree that we should be taking a more active role in other ME countries. For better or worse (worse), we've established a track record of meddling in their affairs, to their detriment, and I think the best way for us to start reversing that reputation is to stay out of their business while they get themselves together -- unless our help is requested, or there appears to be something forming that would be an active security threat to our interests.
 
It's not a real democracy and there will never be a real election with opposing candidates... It will pretty much be - Do you want Sharia Law or do you want Sharia Law. How is that democracy?

It would be like putting 5 Pepsi's out on a table and asking which drink they would like - I would assume it would be a Pepsi..

It is not our business. We wouldn't let another country come here and tell us how to run our government. We shouldn't be telling them how to run theirs. If they want to live by Sharia Law, so be it.
 
I do indeed, I've written several articles about him. I also find it somewhat ironic that you cite Qutb as an example of what will lead to another Iran. Anyways, the Muslim Brotherhood is a diffuse organization with many different currents of opinion and political thought and power. At present Mr. Mursi has done nothing so egregious that it should cause a breach in relations or a lack of faith in the shift towards a democratic Egypt, certainly nothing that would cause the alarm bells of an Islamist take over. The policy at present should be to assist where needed, and to suspend judgement.

They're already gearing up for Sharia Law...

I'm not against religion but religious law shouldn't be law of the land.

I would compare the Muslim Brotherhood to the Italian Mafia (and I'm Sicilian) - Yet the Brotherhood's ethics are religious in nature.

That was not democracy that was a subtle false flag coup.
 
It is not our business. We wouldn't let another country come here and tell us how to run our government. We shouldn't be telling them how to run theirs. If they want to live by Sharia Law, so be it.

You will be singing a different tune when Iran, Egypt, Libya etc join forces to destroy Israel then point their guns at us....

Do you really want those countries to be turned into glass because they cant behave themselves?

Oh yeah, lets not forget this is all over religion to boot...
 
You will be singing a different tune when Iran, Egypt, Libya etc join forces to destroy Israel then point their guns at us....

Do you really want those countries to be turned into glass because they cant behave themselves?

Oh yeah, lets not forget his is all over religion to boot...

This isn't just over religion. There is a lot more at play here. It is much more complexe.
What you seem to be saying is we should have a pre-imptive strike against countries that have the Muslim Brotherhood in leadership positions all because they might attack Israel? That is a horrible foraign policy. The world would begin to, and rightly so, see the US as a threat to the world. We can't force our agenda on other countries and we can't go around attacking countries just because we think they might join forces against us. That kind of policy creates more enemies than allies.
 
Back
Top Bottom