• 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!

Obama leaves UN a changed statesman

Fletch said:
Im not. Just curious as to why leftist Obama puppets are constantly comparing him to the man they view as the worst president in history. But we both know the reason. Obama is just as bad if not worse.
Click to expand...

Comparing the recent president to the next most recent president is hardly a deflection. Obama has turned around a lot of the trash of Bush's absolutely horrible presidency but Obama's accomplishments are not even close to what I want policy-wise. Of course he's not a dictator so he can't put forth all that he wants. If he got all of what he wanted it'd probably be a lot closer to what I want. I think he's horrible at over-compromising with people who have already admitted several times that they are out to take him down first and foremost rather than represent constituents or lead the country.
 
poweRob said:
no. I recall reading about what Russians blamed for them losing in Afghanistan. They said they could not strike legitamite deals with anyone. As soon as they would work out an alliance, that alliance would betray them. They said they could trust absolutely no one there and that's why their war failed.



This is the scenario we are in. We arm them and now we are "showing them what real war is." It doesn't work. I'm all for stepping in against genocide. But proxy wars where we are clearly in but not in... blows up in our faces all the time. It never works. It's either shyte or get off the pot. You can't have someone take a crap for you when it comes to this stuff. It might work on smaller scales but not this big.
Click to expand...

Whats trust got to do with getting your enemy to sell his soul to you just so he gets a chance to keep breathing? We should always keep our end of the bargain, we should just fail to inform our enemies/clients that we are dealing with their enemies as well. Trust please. No trust is required. Just payment on delivery, or no sale. That's all. We have bigger guns than they do. They want our guns they come up with the cash. The object is to keep them occupied on each other and expending their resources countering the weapons we sell each side, hopefully getting them into a vicious cycle where both sides expend themselves to exhaustion or oblivion, preferably the latter. We act like a drug dealer and get the junkies hooked on our crack. If things go well our junkies stay hooked and stupid. If not then they kick our habit and become civilized at least for a period of time while they recover from their stupidity. In either case we come out ahead. If we are feeling especially manipulative we can shade the side we favor with better deals so they come out on top eventually. They get all the war they want until they don't want anymore or they are all dead, and we for the most part get to stay at arms length out of their crap which hopefully stays regional. Its time we bled both sides dry, the sides being Iran and Saudi Arabia who are funding all this crap.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Whats trust got to do with getting your enemy to sell his soul to you just so he gets a chance to keep breathing? We should always keep our end of the bargain, we should just fail to inform our enemies/clients that we are dealing with their enemies as well. Trust please. No trust is required. Just payment on delivery, or no sale. That's all. We have bigger guns than they do. They want our guns they come up with the cash. The object is to keep them occupied on each other and expending their resources countering the weapons we sell each side, hopefully getting them into a vicious cycle where both sides expend themselves to exhaustion or oblivion, preferably the latter. We act like a drug dealer and get the junkies hooked on our crack. If things go well our junkies stay hooked and stupid. If not then they kick our habit and become civilized at least for a period of time while they recover from their stupidity. In either case we come out ahead. If we are feeling especially manipulative we can shade the side we favor with better deals so they come out on top eventually. They get all the war they want until they don't want anymore or they are all dead, and we for the most part get to stay at arms length out of their crap which hopefully stays regional. Its time we bled both sides dry, the sides being Iran and Saudi Arabia who are funding all this crap.
Click to expand...

In the ME, who is your ally becomes your enemy in no time flat. So no matter how well you keep your agreements your goals always fall flat when the other end fails to follow through on theirs. Under Reagan, we armed Iraq and armed Iran at the same time they were at war with each other. Not only did it not work, it made everything worse for us from that point forward in that region. Such duplicitous actions tend to fail miserably.
 
poweRob said:
no. I recall reading about what Russians blamed for them losing in Afghanistan. They said they could not strike legitamite deals with anyone. As soon as they would work out an alliance, that alliance would betray them. They said they could trust absolutely no one there and that's why their war failed.



This is the scenario we are in. We arm them and now we are "showing them what real war is." It doesn't work. I'm all for stepping in against genocide. But proxy wars where we are clearly in but not in... blows up in our faces all the time. It never works. It's either shyte or get off the pot. You can't have someone take a crap for you when it comes to this stuff. It might work on smaller scales but not this big.
Click to expand...

Side note we haven't shown anybody anything remotely like a real war since World War 2 when we firebombed several cities to oblivion. Tokyo, Munich, Hamburg, Dresden to name some. The nukes we dropped didn't do the damage our thousand plane firebomb raids did. People everywhere would take notice if we did something like that today. We have done real war in quite some time. Perhaps a reminder of war in its true form, is in order.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Side note we haven't shown anybody anything remotely like a real war since World War 2 when we firebombed several cities to oblivion. Tokyo, Munich, Hamburg, Dresden to name some. The nukes we dropped didn't do the damage our thousand plane firebomb raids did. People everywhere would take notice if we did something like that today. We have done real war in quite some time. Perhaps a reminder of war in its true form, is in order.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
 
poweRob said:
In the ME, who is your ally becomes your enemy in no time flat. So no matter how well you keep your agreements your goals always fall flat when the other end fails to follow through on theirs. Under Reagan, we armed Iraq and armed Iran at the same time they were at war with each other. Not only did it not work, it made everything worse for us from that point forward in that region. Such duplicitous actions tend to fail miserably.
Click to expand...

You don't get it, we aren't their ally. We don't pretend to be their ally. They are our enemies. We don't pretend otherwise. The only agreement we make is to sell them arms and military knowhow. That's dependent on payment. No payment no weapons. We are giving this stuff for free right now. Which puts us at more risk and costs us treasure. They want our weapons and knowhow then they or their allies ,which we are not, will come up with the cash if they wish to be viable against the opponent of the hour. If they point blank ask us if we are selling to their enemies we say yes. We don't advertise we are doing that. If they ask us why, we be honest, and say we hope you each kill each other off. Or you can be polite and say that we serve all clients. We didn't arm Iran at the same time they were fighting Iraq. The arms the had were the weapons the Shaw had bought before he was removed from power. They got the rest from the Russians.
 
PirateMk1 said:
You don't get it, we aren't their ally. We don't pretend to be their ally. They are our enemies. We don't pretend otherwise. The only agreement we make is to sell them arms and military knowhow. That's dependent on payment. No payment no weapons. We are giving this stuff for free right now. Which puts us at more risk and costs us treasure. They want our weapons and knowhow then they or their allies ,which we are not, will come up with the cash if they wish to be viable against the opponent of the hour. If they point blank ask us if we are selling to their enemies we say yes. We don't advertise we are doing that. If they ask us why, we be honest, and say we hope you each kill each other off. Or you can be polite and say that we serve all clients. We didn't arm Iran at the same time they were fighting Iraq. The arms the had were the weapons the Shaw had bought before he was removed from power. They got the rest from the Russians.
Click to expand...

Funding both sides of a war... yeah. I guess its fair for you to say I don't get it.
 
shrubnose said:
Barack Obama left the annual United Nations meeting Thursday with his presidency reshaped by a new era of global turbulence and his worldview sharpened by global jihadism's "heart of darkness".

Read the article here: Obama leaves UN a changed statesman

The world has changed a lot in the last year and the USA and it's allies all over this planet have a lot of threats to deal with in the Middle East and in Europe and Africa.

The USA can't deal with all of those threats on its own, It will need the help of its allies.

What do you think?
Click to expand...



Heya SN. :2wave: Yeah his presidency has been reshaped by Reality.....and not BO peeps grand delusions as to his Concepts about America. Like with everything else he has to constantly reset his policies. Which none of these resets have bettered our prospects.

Granted we will need help from allies.....We will have to strengthen those Alliances, recommit....all due to BO's Inability in Understanding what Real Friends are all about.



President Barack Obama glossed over some inconvenient truths Tuesday in his climate-change speech to the United Nations. For one, as the U.S. cleans up emissions at home, it's sending dirty fuel abroad to pollute the same sky. As well, the U.S. is not cleaning up quite as aggressively as Obama implied in his remarks. A look at some of Obama's claims and how they compare with the facts:.....snip~

FACT CHECK: Obama in UN speech spins statistics


Seems he didn't come out any better as any type of Statesman.....he went with the usual For himself and his Team. He Lied!
 
Looks like the British showed your man Boehner how to do his job.

While your President has been bombing the piss out of ISIL since Congress first went on vacation,
the UK waited to piggy back off Mr. Obama when it was safe.

I assume you wish the CiC and our troops success ?

MMC said:
Heya SN. :2wave: Yeah his presidency has been reshaped by Reality.....and not BO peeps grand delusions as to his Concepts about America. Like with everything else he has to constantly reset his policies. Which none of these resets have bettered our prospects.

Granted we will need help from allies.....We will have to strengthen those Alliances, recommit....all due to BO's Inability in Understanding what Real Friends are all about.



President Barack Obama glossed over some inconvenient truths Tuesday in his climate-change speech to the United Nations. For one, as the U.S. cleans up emissions at home, it's sending dirty fuel abroad to pollute the same sky. As well, the U.S. is not cleaning up quite as aggressively as Obama implied in his remarks. A look at some of Obama's claims and how they compare with the facts:.....snip~

FACT CHECK: Obama in UN speech spins statistics


Seems he didn't come out any better as any type of Statesman.....he went with the usual For himself and his Team. He Lied!
Click to expand...

Still calling your Cic names huh.
Yer just like yer GOP brothers and sisters at the Values conference . :lamo
 
NIMBY said:
Looks like the British showed your man Boehner how to do his job.

While your President has been bombing the piss out of ISIL since Congress first went on vacation,
the UK waited to piggy back off Mr. Obama when it was safe.

I assume you wish the CiC and our troops success ?



Still calling your Cic names huh.
Yer just like yer GOP brothers and sisters at the Values conference . :lamo
Click to expand...


Whats really funny is how you don't know **** about BO peep Nimby.....don't know nothing about him much at all.

Why don't you tell all those Lefty pals of yours.....why BO trembled to walk the streets of Chicago. Why the average 3million other Chicagoans had no problem with it. When you can figure out what runs thru BO's DNA, then get back to me.
 
Your feelings about your President are well known MMC.
Too bad you can't let them end at our shores .
MMC said:
Whats really funny is how you don't know **** about BO peep Nimby.....don't know nothing about him much at all.

Why don't you tell all those Lefty pals of yours.....why BO trembled to walk the streets of Chicago. Why the average 3million other Chicagoans had no problem with it. When you can figure out what runs thru BO's DNA, then get back to me.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
Your feelings about your President are well known MMC.
Too bad you can't let them end at our shores .
Click to expand...


To bad you can't stay focused on BO, and like most of the left.....come from way out in left field with all those attempts at trying to going personal.

Why is BO peep afraid of physical violence? Why is BO peep afraid of verbal violence? Why does he fear these things so much? Why has he feared them all his life.....so much?
 
poweRob said:
Directly taking on ISIS.
Is going balls to the wall in Africa against Ebola.
Click to expand...

He's taking on ISIS with a coalition which is indirect especially since he's claimed the US will not send in ground troops.

Yes after nearly 3,000 deaths and 7 months passing, Obama is finally seemingly getting serious about Ebola.
 
Perotista said:
I think he is right. I know I do not want us to continue to be the policeman of the world. I think our allies need to pick up a lot of slack. I think if something is happening in Europe's back yard, then Europe ought to take the lead and the heavy lifting. I realize there are places around the globe where we do not have that many allies, where we may just have to lead. But those allies of ours, if whatever is taking place in their backyard, then it should be up to them. We can help, but we should not jump into every little fray or ruckus that happens when we have allies closer to that ruckus or action.
Click to expand...

I certainly felt that way about the Bosnia conflict. That was in the major powers back yard in Europe in Europe. They should have been able to handle it before it got out of hand.
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

Agreed! Who would come to our aid if we needed assistance, other than Canada? Hopefully, that will never happen, but I suppose it could. And I sometimes question what France is doing. It just seems like they are always agitating to get us involved in things, and while they are helping with eliminating ISIS, the threat is really in their own back yard, as you point out, so it's certainly in their own best interest to join in! Are the Eurozone countries and the UK helping?
Click to expand...

I think we do have a few allies we can depend on. Canada, Great Britain, and Australia.
 
shrubnose said:
What's your point? That doesn't say that he reshaped anything. It says that his presidency was reshaped.

You just don't get it.
Click to expand...

Well...you do have a point there. Obama's presidency was reshaped by his incompetency in regards to handling events that came up.
 
shrubnose said:
Obama is not a great president,he's somewhere in the middle. Bush is one of the worst ever and history will record that.
Click to expand...

Actually the two worst presidents in history to this point are Jimmy Carter and Barack "Hussein" Obama.
 
poweRob said:
Comparing the recent president to the next most recent president is hardly a deflection. Obama has turned around a lot of the trash of Bush's absolutely horrible presidency but Obama's accomplishments are not even close to what I want policy-wise. Of course he's not a dictator so he can't put forth all that he wants. If he got all of what he wanted it'd probably be a lot closer to what I want. I think he's horrible at over-compromising with people who have already admitted several times that they are out to take him down first and foremost rather than represent constituents or lead the country.
Click to expand...

What exactly did Obama turn around? And yes, Obama is a wannabe dictator. His threat to carry out executive orders on everything Congress will not give him bears that out.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I certainly felt that way about the Bosnia conflict. That was in the major powers back yard in Europe in Europe. They should have been able to handle it before it got out of hand.
Click to expand...

I agree, I am with you on Bosnia. Also, since it was the French and other European Countries that were the most hot to trot about Libya and Qaddafi, they should have handled it 100%.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Actually the two worst presidents in history to this point are Jimmy Carter and Barack "Hussein" Obama.
Click to expand...



That is your incorrect opinion which you are entitled to and I will ignore.

If you would do just a little research you would quickly discover that G.W. Bush is one of the worst presidents ever and Obama is somewhere in he middle.

But keep believing whatever makes you happy, that won't cost me a penny or have any effect on reality. :roll:
 
shrubnose said:
Obama is not a great president,he's somewhere in the middle. Bush is one of the worst ever and history will record that.
Click to expand...

Based on what exactly? His ability to call criticism racist?
 
ObamacareFail said:
Actually the two worst presidents in history to this point are Jimmy Carter and Barack "Hussein" Obama.
Click to expand...

It's too early to tell. But if you're talking about Presidents within our own lifetimes, I think you may have a point.
 
nota bene said:
It's too early to tell. But if you're talking about Presidents within our own lifetimes, I think you may have a point.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Believe whatever you want to believe, but if you do a little research you will discover that most historians don't agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom