Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Obama is afraid
Obama is afraid of Iran. He sent two ambassadors from European countries to tell Iran that he would not assist Israel in attacking Iran and return he begged that Iran not attack our military or other U.S. interests.
Obama is afraid of Russia. He asked Russia to give him more time so he could (and this is implied) deep six the U.S. anti-missile shield in Europe.
Obama is afraid of China. Obama gave China an exemption when it came to sanctions against Iran. Hillary is visiting China saying that China needs to pursue a non-violent, non-confrontation path towards resolving disputed territory with Japan.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We are still animals with base survival motivations. Sometimes these emotions get us into trouble. What benefit will we get out of committing our resources to these portions of the world? This question should be asked above all others when the the risk of losing lives is extremely probable. When we are free of our need for petroleum for a fuel source, the answer to this question is easy.
ReplyDeleteEvery time I read your posts about foreign policy Live, it's like being transported back to my neighborhood where I grew up listening to guys in tank top t-shirts talking about how to solve some issue; "You wanna solve dis? Just walk up to that punk and say, I'M GONNA KICK YER ASS! den ya just BAM! pop im right in da face and kick im in da balls when e' hits da ground." "I guarantee, that punk won't EVER mess wit you again"
ReplyDeleteEverything to you is some failure or missed opportunity to scare someone and let em know who's boss.
Where did you grow up Max?.......Sounds like Chicago.
DeleteIran is bullying us. China is bullying us. Russia is bullying us.
ReplyDeleteSo when do we kick em in the balls as you say?
Iran is bullying us? Please explain. I don't believe that they have ever told us what to do, except to stay out of their business as a sovereign nation. Russia on the other hand has never stopped being a threat. I fear that our foreign policy with regard to them has been lulled into a false sense of security and we will pay for that in the future.
DeleteYou kick them in the balls when they make a genuine move that actually impacts us. I know live that you prefer the method wherein it's better to be feared then loved. But in the year 2012 versus 1950, it's not so simple. To implement what you want requires a lot of money, a lot of material and a lot of troops. The Brits lost their empire but remain a sovereign nation. Do you want endless conflicts that drain blood and treasure from us? At some point, you have to make crass but honest decisions about how much blood and treasure you will flat out waste to retain a given amount of empire or fear of you.
ReplyDeleteYour opinion on these matters is curious to me Live. Neocon logic is that we should put a boot up everyone's ass lest they view us as weak and receive encouragement that it's okay to fuck with us. The founding fathers and people like Ron Paul and even Ayn Rand were clearly against big military's and were even more against playing empire. At some point, when your outlook is that you need to spend billions of dollars to protect an equal amount of interest outside out borders, isn't it worth asking where we should set a limit?
Tell Me Max....You criticize those who advocate a strong defense posture,How would Max do it?
DeleteDo you fail to realize that there are many in this world that really don't like us and our way of life?
"Do you fail to realize that there are many in this world that really don't like us and our way of life?"
DeleteThis is a false premise. The world does not remotely dislike us for our way of life, or "For our Freedom". That is complete bullshit. What they dislike us for is heavy handedness in protecting our interests. Sometimes we try to minimize this impact, other times we act like we don't give a shit.
What I criticize Rojay is the one size fits all approach that is driven by fear and bullshit. When the only tool you possess is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail to pound down. Clearly, we cannot dominate and control the entire world with our military. It is not unreasonable or weak to acknowledge that fact and in turn, put some limits on the size of the military. Curious you mention that I am critical of those who advocate a strong defensive posture when I mention that Ron Paul, hardly a liberal, pretty much has the same position.
I'm not against a defensive posture, but I would prefer for us to drop the bullshit of "They hate us for our freedom" and engage in discussions of substance such as the fact the Russia, China and the US all have interests that are not congruous with each other. Outright war is by far the worst way to solve these problems. However, we are instead now fighting proxy wars and using countries like Israel and Iran like pawns. The paranoid belief is that we must win and others lose before they make us lose. When your view is that narrow, you are predictable and handcuffed from solving problems with methods that incur the least amount of damage.