Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 115

Thread: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

  1. #31
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    Well..... Really? This is not a game with unknown players. You learn from how players acted in the past.
    If a red line is drawn it becomes critical national interest, because everyone sees, what you do, when the line is crossed and adapt their strategy accordingly. So if you do nothing, you have sent a signal that, what you say can be ignored. This will increase your costs in later engagements.
    If you are suggesting that a nation should act when it draws a red line, I agree. Otherwise, credibility is eroded. But that's a different point.

    My point concerns the issue as to why deterrence failed. When it comes to deterrence, one of the essential elements is whether the target nation (Syria in this case) knows a country is sufficiently strong to carry out its threat and whether it is willing to do so. There's little doubt that Syria knew that the U.S. is sufficiently strong to deliver on its threat. The latter element was in doubt, because the threat was not tied to critical American interests. Syria calculated that the U.S. might not be willing to deliver on the threat, because absent critical interests there was nothing to all but require U.S. military action. Rhetoric is far cheaper than concrete interests. Hence, Syria ignored the red line and deterrence failed.

  2. #32
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    If you are suggesting that a nation should act when it draws a red line, I agree. Otherwise, credibility is eroded. But that's a different point.

    My point concerns the issue as to why deterrence failed. When it comes to deterrence, one of the essential elements is whether the target nation (Syria in this case) knows a country is sufficiently strong to carry out its threat and whether it is willing to do so. There's little doubt that Syria knew that the U.S. is sufficiently strong to deliver on its threat. The latter element was in doubt, because the threat was not tied to critical American interests. Syria calculated that the U.S. might not be willing to deliver on the threat, because absent critical interests there was nothing to all but require U.S. military action. Rhetoric is far cheaper than concrete interests. Hence, Syria ignored the red line and deterrence failed.
    What emboldened president Assad was the fact that both Russia and China denied the US a resolution for force in Syria, and Russia in particular vowed that they would NOT allow the US to do to Syria what was done to Libya.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #33
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Any credible potential Democratic candidate would distance themselves from Obama's foreign policy. He frankly has a very poor record there so offering a critical perspective pre-2016 election is required. Hillary will say, and rightly so, that the buck stops with the President - not the Secretary of State. The reason Libya, Syria, Iraq and possibly Afghanistan in the future will plunge into chaos is because of indecision and incompetence by Obama and his staff. Hillary will be able to claim she tried to sway the WH to save the 100,000 + Syrians who died after the famed "red line" statement, only to be over ruled by Obama.

    I in no way believe Hillary's hands are clean here - but she and her campaign staff will certainly post the doubt on an ailing and feckless Obama who's last term is quickly approaching, and may proffer herself as the "HAWK" on international issues such as the melting middle east. If Rand Paul runs against her, it will be a curious role reversal with a Democrat running as the hawk, and the Republican running as the dove.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  4. #34
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,715

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    It means that it is better not to issue what appears to your listeners to be an ultimatum and then not do, what was understood to be your threat, when the ultimatum is broken, to leave it dangling on an open note.

    True, this may seem simpler than it is. You may have been misunderstood to begin with or the ultimatum was technically not broken, or the solution you then found was better than was understood. You might want to argue that the important people knew you did, what you said. That is all very intellectual and fine in that respect. But it does not really cut it and confuses other decision makers and more importantly their populaces.
    Does this site have a tap dancing award? Holy ****!

    Dood has been lost on foreign policy since day one. He began alienating world leaders right out of the gate. No one trusts him. Theres no way he could form a coalition of willing participants. He is a failed community organizer...that was the limit and extent of his skill set...doing a bad job trying to provide support for enrollment.

  5. #35
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,950
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatNews2night View Post
    Reuters, quoting an interview with The Atlantic:

    Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy





    She directly seems to attribute the rise of ISIS to Obama's refusal to arm the Syrian rebels, which she was for.

    She may have a point. I'm not sure if it would have worked, since it was hard to identify who should be armed, and they might easily turn against us afterwards.

    Regardless of her having a point or not, it is disgraceful that for election advantage, she is now spitting at an administration she was a part of.

    On the other hand, regardless of her antics, it is clear to me at this point that the Obama doctrine of non-intervention in foreign affairs is a disgrace. He is proving to be one of the worst US presidents in history, and the entire world is about to pay the price. No, I don't want the US to be the police of the world, but we can't disengage abruptly without a solidly supported international order to keep things going. We were fulfilling this role; we suddenly withdrew, and now the world is a mess.

    By the way, we won't fix the ISIS mess with three airstrike sorties, taking down one convoy and one artillery piece. Obama's wishy-washy half-baked commitment will not solve anything.

    I say so in spite of having voted for Obama twice, something I now regret and am ashamed of. Not that the alternatives were any good, anyway, but by now I'm sick and tired of Obama and wish he'd resign.

    Anyway, I'm packing too much into this original post (because I'm so frustrated with Obama). Maybe we should just discuss what Hillary said - does she have a point, and is it disgraceful to speak up against her former boss (in order to earn votes)?

    Opinions?
    As for the Syrian Rebels, the weapons we gave where in the hands of the Turks to distribute. We really didn’t have that much say in whom they ended up with. We had to trust the Turks. I am sure some if not most ended up with organizations within the rebels that are not our friends.

    As far as Hillary stating her view point as being a disgrace, she has that right. She is no longer in government and who knows, the disagreement over arming the Syrian Rebels may be one of the main reasons she resigned. She has to worry about making herself more popular with the American people if she is to run successfully for president in 2016. Distancing oneself from an unpopular president and some of his policies is nothing new. Landrieu, Hagan, Begich, Pryor, all have done so this year while running for re-election in the senate. Hillary just joins a long list that could be getting longer.

    The presidents non-interventionist policies is exactly what most Americans wanted. They wanted out of Iraq, they want us out of Afghanistan, they didn’t want us to bomb in Syria. But as you say, the emergence of ISIS has shown that without someone to replace our steadying influence, the bad guys can run wild. We’ll see how the airstrikes work out, the president has authorized a bunch more and has given the military the leeway to conduct those airstrikes when and where they see fit. This in my opinion is a step in the right direction.

    I think in protecting the Kurds, a loyal U.S. ally is a must. I still have mixed feelings about the Maliki government. He is way too cozy with the Iranians and I am sure the Iranians would not let him fall. Assad also has provided a few airstrikes to help Maliki out, the same Assad we are bent on taking out of power. That in my opinion is a mistake, Assad is the only person able to bring stability to Syria and he is a foe of ISIS.

    Back to Hillary, I don’t blame her. She needs to let the public know what she would do different. If she is to win in 2016 and if the president continues to only receive a 40% approval rating, she will need to do more distancing than just this from him.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  6. #36
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    What emboldened president Assad was the fact that both Russia and China denied the US a resolution for force in Syria, and Russia in particular vowed that they would NOT allow the US to do to Syria what was done to Libya.
    I don't believe Syria really placed great weight on the idea that the U.S. depended on Security Council resolutions for authorization to use military force, though the absence of such a resolution might have been an additional factor in Syria's calculations. Russia, in particular, felt that the U.S. had gone beyond the understanding of the resolution that was adopted concerning Libya and had taken a position that it would not support similar resolutions in the future. From Russia's perspective that it felt ambiguity was used to move beyond what it felt was a position of consensus (civilian protection, not regime change), I can understand the position they've taken on such resolutions. China's position is more complex and involves more variables.

  7. #37
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    As for the Syrian Rebels, the weapons we gave where in the hands of the Turks to distribute. We really didn’t have that much say in whom they ended up with. We had to trust the Turks. I am sure some if not most ended up with organizations within the rebels that are not our friends.

    As far as Hillary stating her view point as being a disgrace, she has that right. She is no longer in government and who knows, the disagreement over arming the Syrian Rebels may be one of the main reasons she resigned. She has to worry about making herself more popular with the American people if she is to run successfully for president in 2016. Distancing oneself from an unpopular president and some of his policies is nothing new. Landrieu, Hagan, Begich, Pryor, all have done so this year while running for re-election in the senate. Hillary just joins a long list that could be getting longer.

    The presidents non-interventionist policies is exactly what most Americans wanted. They wanted out of Iraq, they want us out of Afghanistan, they didn’t want us to bomb in Syria. But as you say, the emergence of ISIS has shown that without someone to replace our steadying influence, the bad guys can run wild. We’ll see how the airstrikes work out, the president has authorized a bunch more and has given the military the leeway to conduct those airstrikes when and where they see fit. This in my opinion is a step in the right direction.

    I think in protecting the Kurds, a loyal U.S. ally is a must. I still have mixed feelings about the Maliki government. He is way too cozy with the Iranians and I am sure the Iranians would not let him fall. Assad also has provided a few airstrikes to help Maliki out, the same Assad we are bent on taking out of power. That in my opinion is a mistake, Assad is the only person able to bring stability to Syria and he is a foe of ISIS.

    Back to Hillary, I don’t blame her. She needs to let the public know what she would do different. If she is to win in 2016 and if the president continues to only receive a 40% approval rating, she will need to do more distancing than just this from him.
    It's a matter of bad US policies in the ME that have strengthened and emboldened militant Islamic jihad.

    Anyway, that's pretty close to an endorsement Pero! Good gawd, no more Bush's and no more Clintons, we don't need America to become an oligarchy.
    Last edited by Montecresto; 08-11-14 at 10:31 AM.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #38
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I don't believe Syria really placed great weight on the idea that the U.S. depended on Security Council resolutions for authorization to use military force, though the absence of such a resolution might have been an additional factor in Syria's calculations. Russia, in particular, felt that the U.S. had gone beyond the understanding of the resolution that was adopted concerning Libya and had taken a position that it would not support similar resolutions in the future. From Russia's perspective that it felt ambiguity was used to move beyond what it felt was a position of consensus (civilian protection, not regime change), I can understand the position they've taken on such resolutions. China's position is more complex and involves more variables.
    I think that means we basically agree at that point.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  9. #39
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:06 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,399

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    The red line was drawn, he "allegedly" crossed that line, and the chemical weapons have been removed. That problem solved.
    So you say. And it is good that (some of?) the chemicals are gone.
    Sorrily that is not the way it seems to be interpreted, which is the main thing in this game. This red line has been made out to be one in a row with other red lines and options on tables from Obama's past; which these were no longer registers nor matters. He is not perceived to be a man to stand to his threats. That is not good in a President.

  10. #40
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:06 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,399

    Re: Hillary Clinton distances herself from Obama's foreign policy

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    If you are suggesting that a nation should act when it draws a red line, I agree. Otherwise, credibility is eroded. But that's a different point.

    My point concerns the issue as to why deterrence failed. When it comes to deterrence, one of the essential elements is whether the target nation (Syria in this case) knows a country is sufficiently strong to carry out its threat and whether it is willing to do so. There's little doubt that Syria knew that the U.S. is sufficiently strong to deliver on its threat. The latter element was in doubt, because the threat was not tied to critical American interests. Syria calculated that the U.S. might not be willing to deliver on the threat, because absent critical interests there was nothing to all but require U.S. military action. Rhetoric is far cheaper than concrete interests. Hence, Syria ignored the red line and deterrence failed.
    It was essentially the same calculation Saddam had made, when he bet that the Moscow-Berlin-Paris axis would prevent Bush from deposing him.

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •