• 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!

Lech Walesa: Obama Doesn't Care If US Reamains World Superpower

Lech Walesa: Obama Doesn't Care If US Reamains World Superpower

And neither do I.
 
Who would you rather see be the worlds super power if not us? You do realize some country will hold that position don't you? Or do you?

a country can last almost forever. read up on empires, and then we'll have a discussion
 
Obama doesn't care if US remains world superpower. Know what? Me neither. In fact I'd prefer it if it didn't.
 
Still does not answer my question. If you don't want us to be the worlds super power who do you want to fill that position?

It's not a vacancy that needs filling. A balance of equal and opposite forces is a better state of affairs.
 
It's not a vacancy that needs filling. A balance of equal and opposite forces is a better state of affairs.

Unfortunately the real world does not work that way. If we don't remain the worlds superpower someone will fill that vacancy and it will likely be China or Russia. Better them than us?
 
Unfortunately the real world does not work that way. If we don't remain the worlds superpower someone will fill that vacancy and it will likely be China or Russia. Better them than us?

I don't think that's true, as I don't think those other countries have the same ambition to play world policeman. China and Russia seem considerably less meddlesome by inclination, if not any more benevolent.
 
It's not a vacancy that needs filling. A balance of equal and opposite forces is a better state of affairs.

Yep. But some people prefer the imbalance, just so long as its weighted towards the US.
 
You are scary naive.

In the past 25 years let's see how many countries have been invaded by:

a) China = 0
b) Russia = 1, Georgia 2008
c) USA = 5, Panama 1989, Haiti 1994, Yugoslavia 1998, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003

I think most neutral observers would conclude that China and Russia might adopt a less aggressive approach to international relations.
 
Still does not answer my question. If you don't want us to be the worlds super power who do you want to fill that position?

you're a fast reader.

ok, i'll answer your question after you answer mine. in five hundred words or less, please explain to me in your own words the global history of empires. i need to make sure that you have an understanding of this aspect of history before wasting any time discussing it with you.
 
you're a fast reader.

ok, i'll answer your question after you answer mine. in five hundred words or less, please explain to me in your own words the global history of empires. i need to make sure that you have an understanding of this aspect of history before wasting any time discussing it with you.

You just keep dodging my question. If we are not going to be the worlds super power who will or should be? It is a one word answer but I suspect you will keep running.
 
In the past 25 years let's see how many countries have been invaded by:

a) China = 0
b) Russia = 1, Georgia 2008
c) USA = 5, Panama 1989, Haiti 1994, Yugoslavia 1998, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003

I think most neutral observers would conclude that China and Russia might adopt a less aggressive approach to international relations.

Tibet Online - Why Tibet? - Major Allegations on the Chinese Occupation

Military occupations by the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
You just keep dodging my question. If we are not going to be the worlds super power who will or should be? It is a one word answer but I suspect you will keep running.

you are being intellectually lazy. i have an answer to your question. if you'd like to hear it, answer mine.
 
President Obama is trying to steer America away from WAR. Yes he has to bend and bow to other world leaders. We have to live on earth together somehow. And if that is viewed as not caring about being Superpower, so be it. He has a plan and has to fight conservatives tooth and nail to get anything done.

:confused: Obama is trying to stear America away from War? :confused: What planet are you living on? We're still in Afghanistan last I looked, still droning Pakistan and many other places, was in a war with Lybia, gave weapons to terrorists to help over throw the Syrian government (the only reason he backed down on that was due to Putin showing him up of all people). What war has he tried to stop exactly? And don't even claim that he got us out of Iraq because it wasn't his plan that was used to withdraw from Iraq. It was a plan made by Bush and Iraq officials. He couldn't have changed that without looking REALLY bad.
 

So, score one for China, 65 years ago. Of course then you have to add Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic to the US slate. As for the Soviet Union, it doesn't exist any more, so it really can't be viewed as a threat, but if you want to add Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghsnistan to their score-card, go ahead. We're still at 1:4:10. You still have a lot of work to do to convince anyone that there's a bigger threat to world peace and national self-determination around than the USA.
 
I have no idea what you are saying.

Do you man that no one is denying that Obama is President, or that no one says that Obama is President.

Double negatives can be so confusing.

I'll give you a few examples.

I've been working closely with the Burial of Land Management (BMI) and have more than a few say as if there's no one in charge within the BMI or the Dept. of Interior in Washington DC.

Have had many in the U.S. Forest Service say that as if no one is in charge in Washington DC. Middle management is running everything.

Have a couple of buddies who work at JPL and Cal-Tech and they say the person Obama put in charge of NASA is clueless and there's nobody in charge in Washington DC.

Know many U.S. Border Patrol Agents, they are told by their Obama appointed bosses in Washington DC not to do their jobs.

Now look at the IRS and targeting conservatives. Obama said he was out of the loop and the Secretary of the Treasury said he was clueless. Who in the #### is really in charge ?

Who was in charge of the State Department on 9-11-12 ?

Now the Department of Defense does seem to have civilians in charge who are clueless and incompetent when it comes to national defense but are well qualified for initiating social engineering upon the military.
 
So, score one for China, 65 years ago. Of course then you have to add Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic to the US slate. As for the Soviet Union, it doesn't exist any more, so it really can't be viewed as a threat, but if you want to add Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghsnistan to their score-card, go ahead. We're still at 1:4:10. You still have a lot of work to do to convince anyone that there's a bigger threat to world peace and national self-determination around than the USA.

25 years ago, which was your metric, the USSR did exist. China also invaded Korea on the side of the North.

On the other hand, Russia didn't really invade Georgia in 2008. Russian troops were there as part of a peacekeeping force agreed to by Georgia. They did bump up their peacekeepers significantly, but it wasn't exactly an invasion. The first shots of the war were fired by Georgian troops. Again, whether or not they were justified is a matter of debate. Strictly speaking though, Russia didn't invade Georgia out of nowhere.
 
Hmm, appointed positions suffering? Wonder why that would be....
 
90% of your arguments are "you heard" or "scuttlebutt is." Forgive me if I don't take your word for it.

The majority of my college fraternity was Army guys, and pretty much all have been in one of the respective hot zones. I am in constant contact with almost all of them, except for the guys who are doing hardcore stuff ... nobody really gets to talk to them much. Some like Obama, some don't. A few feel that Obama is selling them up the river, many more don't. See, anecdotal evidence works in my favor too.

Your community college had fraternities ?

I belonged to a fraternity when I attended UCLB. It wasn't recognized by the university and was located on the beach at 22nd Street in Hermosa Beach twelve miles from the campus. We even had a beach house on 13th St. where we kept our boards and used as a crash pad.
 
You still have a lot of work to do to convince anyone that there's a bigger threat to world peace and national self-determination around than the USA.

But if you're the USA, why would you care? You're not going to invade yourself.

Now expand that: if you're a Western power or Japan/Taiwan/ROK, your know the US isn't going to invade you either, so who cares?

Now expand that: if you're an ally of any of the nations I've mentioned, you know the US isn't going to invade you, so who cares?

You'll find that world peace and self-determination are seen through the eyes of the developed world. And no, the US isn't the biggest threat to it: the US helped make it.

So then you realize it's a little more complicated that just counting countries. And that doesn't even get into how the US has basically been the enforcer for the western/developed world for the past 70+ years.
 
Back
Top Bottom