• 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 Snubbed by Chinese at G20

99percenter said:
That is just a ridiculous claim. As long as obl was alive he was a threat and planning attacks against the US. When someone says obl isn't a threat they are clearly bat**** crazy.
Click to expand...
So not only are you having an issue with honesty but also a reading comprehension problem as well. I never said he was not a threat I said he was not as near the threat he used to be. One can still pose a threat even if it is a reduced threat. Which anyone who is trying to run an organization and plan operations with very little contact with the outside world is going to be much less of a threat then when they had freedom of movement and communication. The fact you don't understand that says a ton about you.
 
99percenter said:
Let me make it easy for you. Bush closed the CIA unit responsible for looking for obl. End of discussion.
Click to expand...
You claimed that Bush told the CIA to stop looking for Osama. The CIA itself in your own link says not only did they never stop looking for Osama but that the reason that unit changed was due to changes in view within the CIA.
How does it feel to be proven wrong by your own link.

So care to try again and find another link that says Bush told the CIA to stop looking for Osama. Here's a helpful hint. If you do post another link actually read it first. It might save you some embarrassment.
 
This is China doing what China has always done, not playing by the rules. We have mostly turned a blind eye to this over the years because we wanted to bring China "in from the cold". The argument was once they had a big enough stake in the current world order then they would support it, the citizens of China would demand it, just give them time, put up with their bad behavior till then.

No, it has not worked at all like that. China never followed the rules coming from the arrogant and morally bankrupt West, they never intend to, and they never will.

The list of failures of the Western Elite is very very long, but the failure to properly manage China is near the top of the list.

This one could lead to WW3.
 
99percenter said:
It is laughable that people who voted for the biggest ***** in George W Bush are calling obama a weakling.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you're right. I wouldn't know since I didn't vote for Dumbya in either election. Perhaps you should address your comments to someone who did?
 
Opopanax said:
There's always accusations like this from the right leveled at Obama. Yet they can never actually quantify the accusations. In every metric we're more respected around the world than we were before he took office, following what really was one of the most disastrous Presidential administrations in U.S. history.

You want to complain about how we're not strong enough; that we should have prevented Russia/Crimea; that we should have prevented Syria from happening; that we should force the Chinese back onto the mainland. What you advocate is a policy of militarism against two nuclear powers and involvement in a quagmire where there is no definable side that has any ability to take over--a Quagmire with a capital "Q."

Putting aside the inevitability of mushroom clouds from such a reckless and empty-headed foreign policy along the likely end of civilization as we know it, we'd need a 20 million-man military to fight such wars if nukes didn't exist. We had 16 million in WW2, so to propose what you're advocating would require considerably more than that.

But hey, we don't want to look weak to Putin or the Chinese; and we can't allow people in the ME to settle their own damn affairs because America is all about kicking ass.

Or in the alternative we could start Yuuuuge trade wars and trigger a worldwide depression that would make the Great Depression look like a time of plenty. The only problem with that is that such economic conditions would likely lead to another worldwide shooting war.

But that seems to be the way of the modern American hawk; send a bunch of soldiers who aren't me to go die in some 3rd world toilet while I enjoy my Budweiser that called itself America this summer. The problem here though is that it would bring destruction to this country.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly. First of all, I am a liberal of the old definition and adversary ot statism. I don't think that that is being on "the right", though, I do believe in understanding the structure of the game. And assuming that having prevented the Crimean annexation, removing Assad or having helped prevent the islands being built would not have caused or even come close to triggering a nuclear war. But you can be pretty sure that the way Obama has been playing the game structured as it is has brought us 8 years closer to world war and all but lost a chance of changeing the structure of international security to conform with a stable game. Bush had left the world more or less ready to use the UN to achieve it.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
This is China doing what China has always done, not playing by the rules. We have mostly turned a blind eye to this over the years because we wanted to bring China "in from the cold". The argument was once they had a big enough stake in the current world order then they would support it, the citizens of China would demand it, just give them time, put up with their bad behavior till then.

No, it has not worked at all like that. China never followed the rules coming from the arrogant and morally bankrupt West, they never intend to, and they never will.

The list of failures of the Western Elite is very very long, but the failure to properly manage China is near the top of the list.

This one could lead to WW3.
Click to expand...

I hope it does not come to that, but the way we address China has to be changed, or it will become a bull in a...excuse the pun...china shop. I confess I was one of the many who believed that being brought into the fold of global prosperity would bring about social and political change. It has not done that. In fact, for many of us living and working here, it is most evident that some vestiges of the Cultural Revolution are returning, with a distinct cult of personality growing up around the current president Xi. Immersed in the corporate culture in a major industrial town with few foreigners, I have learned all to readily that they respect only strength. As one businesswoman boldly pronounce at a dinner I attended the other night, "There is no right or wrong, only power." Then went on to talk about how she loved the tv series, "Rome."

It is not right what the Chinese did. I know it was all intentional. Yet, I really feel sorry for Obama, and I do not want to have to feel sorry for him. I want the President of the United States to be smart enough in his job to not be made a fool of.
 
SayMyName said:
I hope it does not come to that, but the way we address China has to be changed, or it will become a bull in a...excuse the pun...china shop. I confess I was one of the many who believed that being brought into the fold of global prosperity would bring about social and political change. It has not done that. In fact, for many of us living and working here, it is most evident that some vestiges of the Cultural Revolution are returning, with a distinct cult of personality growing up around the current president Xi. Immersed in the corporate culture in a major industrial town with few foreigners, I have learned all to readily that they respect only strength. As one businesswoman boldly pronounce at a dinner I attended the other night, "There is no right or wrong, only power." Then went on to talk about how she loved the tv series, "Rome."

It is not right what the Chinese did. I know it was all intentional. Yet, I really feel sorry for Obama, and I do not want to have to feel sorry for him. I want the President of the United States to be smart enough in his job to not be made a fool of.
Click to expand...

And did you see what he and his people did? Or rather did not do? They acted like cucks.

This is very very bad.

I have yet to see a single "journalist" take notice.

This is very very bad.

The Chinese for sure took very detailed notes.

This is very very bad.
 
Last edited:
Imagine if it was decided that global strength would be decided upon G20 leaders going into the octagon and duking it out.....

OBAMA
BtcE6ZICYAAsMWD.jpg
alg_barack_obama_milkshake.jpg

PUTIN
putin.jpg
gun_original.jpg

Nuff said
 
Hawkeye10 said:
And did you see what he and his people did? Or rather did not do? They acted like cucks.

This is very very bad.

I have yet to see a single "journalist" take notice.

This is very very bad.

The Chinese for sure took very detailed notes.

This is very very bad.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I am sure we did as well. No doubt they were exhibiting their true colors in anger with President Obama for meeting with the Dalai Lama on 16 June of this year. The show should be worth watching in the next few months as things develop, and I am sure they will. I think if they want to play, it might be time to support Japan in their efforts to modernize their armed forces, and maybe play a bit diplomatically by smiling a bit at Vietnam in regards to their wanting us to open once again our old naval base at Cam Rahn Bay. That would be fun.
 
SayMyName said:
Perhaps, but I am sure we did as well. No doubt they were exhibiting their true colors in anger with President Obama for meeting with the Dalai Lama on 16 June of this year. The show should be worth watching in the next few months as things develop, and I am sure they will. I think if they want to play, it might be time to support Japan in their efforts to modernize their armed forces, and maybe play a bit diplomatically by smiling a bit at Vietnam in regards to their wanting us to open once again our old naval base at Cam Rahn Bay. That would be fun.
Click to expand...

The USA is already seen as an iffy partner in the region, if we are made to look unwilling to stand our ground then China/Russia domination will come easier. Obama of course plays right into this, because his instinct is to turn the other cheek and start running his mouth, he rarely will stand up to do anything when challenged.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
The USA is already seen as an iffy partner in the region, if we are made to look unwilling to stand our ground then China/Russia domination will come easier. Obama of course plays right into this, because his instinct is to turn the other cheek and start running his mouth, he rarely will stand up to do anything when challenged.
Click to expand...

Iffy partner? Dood draws red lines...lines which cannot be crossed. No one messes with someone like that!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I seriously feel that assuming Hillary wins, the USA is going into the South China Sea in strength looking for a fight. I don't have a problem with that, except that we might lose a ship or two, but China is going to lose a hell of a lot more, yet be allowed to retreat with no consequences and blame a "rogue commander". Rogue my ass. They need a confidence builder for their officer corps.

Having said that, I don't have a lot of faith in Hillary's decision making in this area, since she is an unknown quantity. But given her "blow them up and see what happens experiment in the middle east", I'm nervous. She is not known for taking military and strategic advice as shown in the middle east.

I see Trump as more likely to use economic leverage, where as Hillary is more "old school" - ball and truncheon.

Make no mistake about it, Freedom of the Seas is bedrock to US prosperity and one of the most non negotiable theories behind the US economic theory. And we are on a collision path with the Chinese, and for domestic reasons they are itching for a fight. They will give the Clintons nothing.

So we shall see. One thing about Hillary staying out of sight, is that no one knows what she brings to the table, and no one can ask her.
 
chuckiechan said:
So we shall see. One thing about Hillary staying out of sight, is that no one knows what she brings to the table, and no one can ask her.
Click to expand...

So what? She wouldn't tell the truth anyway. I can see no reason for anyone to ask her a question about anything. It is a waste of time. It is something like reporters sitting in a room listening to a press secretary. What a waste of time. They should get up off their tushes and do some investigating rather than reporting on white house propaganda.

People need to stop judging politicians by what they say. It is what they do that matters. What they say is meaningless.
 
chuckiechan said:
I seriously feel that assuming Hillary wins, the USA is going into the South China Sea in strength looking for a fight. I don't have a problem with that, except that we might lose a ship or two, but China is going to lose a hell of a lot more, yet be allowed to retreat with no consequences and blame a "rogue commander". Rogue my ass. They need a confidence builder for their officer corps.

Having said that, I don't have a lot of faith in Hillary's decision making in this area, since she is an unknown quantity. But given her "blow them up and see what happens experiment in the middle east", I'm nervous. She is not known for taking military and strategic advice as shown in the middle east.

I see Trump as more likely to use economic leverage, where as Hillary is more "old school" - ball and truncheon.

Make no mistake about it, Freedom of the Seas is bedrock to US prosperity and one of the most non negotiable theories behind the US economic theory. And we are on a collision path with the Chinese, and for domestic reasons they are itching for a fight. They will give the Clintons nothing.

So we shall see. One thing about Hillary staying out of sight, is that no one knows what she brings to the table, and no one can ask her.
Click to expand...

Actually a rogue commander would not be unlikely. Considering how badly organized the Chinese armed forces are or the CCP's armed forces rather.
 
Carjosse said:
Actually a rogue commander would not be unlikely. Considering how badly organized the Chinese armed forces are or the CCP's armed forces rather.
Click to expand...

Partly true. It also give a weak US president an out so he is not forced to shut the trade door. Our multinational buddies supporting the Clintons won't take kindly to that! I'm certain a rogue officer will be fingered and executed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom