Nanker Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 I just got a thrill right up my drone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Imagine the global uproar if evil Bush had ordered wholesale drone strikes in a neighboring sovereign country that's not "part" of the GWOT? Nixon is rolling over in his grave. Yep...because much of the media and most of the far left progressive caucus are hypocrites...at least with respect to prosecuting the war on terror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) I'll get busted for this but a large part has to do with the level of communication he has with Western leaders and friendly Eastern leaders...his reputation for multi-lateral cooperation whenever possible ( nuclear issues...economic sanctions...etc)..and (here's where it gets controversial) his Nobel speech outlining his basic philosophy that while controversial was relatively well received by most western leaders and was relatively honest (getting up and speaking about the necessity of war at a noble peace presentation lol) He's been a successful diplomat in that sense. Edited June 5, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 I'll get busted for this but a large part has to do with the level of communication he has with Western leaders and friendly Eastern leaders...his reputation for multi-lateral cooperation whenever possible ( nuclear issues...economic sanctions...etc)..and (here's where it gets controversial) his Nobel speech outlining his basic philosophy that while controversial was relatively well received by most western leaders and was relatively honest (getting up and speaking about the necessity of war at a noble peace presentation lol) He's been a successful diplomat in that sense. or...everyone's afraid of being called a racist for criticizing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 or...everyone's afraid of being called a racist for criticizing him. Well I'm talking about international opposition. It's not surprise that with less international outrage we'll have less domestic outrage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 At some point in time we are going to have to capture some of the bad guys so we can give them the ultimate punishment of waterboarding them. Well I'm talking about international opposition. It's not surprise that with less international outrage we'll have less domestic outrage. Or, with more international fear of being called a racist, we'll have more domestic fear of being called a racist. This is idiotic and so is what you wrote above. So, yeah, busted. Is Obama consulting with "western leaders" before saying "shoot"? Yeah, I'm so sure that he's calling up the French, or the people in Oslo, and "eastern leaders" and explaining to them that he's about to kill a guy, and then, order a second shot when the rest of the guys show up, because....it's in line with his speech in 2009? Please. Busted. GTFO with this nonsense. On separate note, how ironic is the "second shot"? It's using terror tactics against them: they love to blow up a bomb, and then, when the 1st responders show up, blow up another one. We do the same, but with 2nd helping of Hellfire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) You just misunderstand what I'm saying. Never said it was inline with his speech (although it is consistent with portions of the speech emphasized and IMO the general thrust of that speech). The point is he's been diplomatic to the point that he is doing things without an overbearing outrage from other nations...and thus he can do it more easily. Assuming for the sake of argument that it was all totally inconsistent with anything he has ever said to international leaders...that would only strengthen my argument b/c the point is not that he's keeping his word it's that his words have had an effect on him not catching as much **** from the international community. It's called success in foreign relations when you balance relationships while still doing whatever you want. As for multi-lateral cooperation IDK if you just didn't read my post or what I specifically said when he can and cited nuclear nonproliferation and economic sanctions as primary areas where he's been a leader in multi-lateral cooperation. And the idea that the international community is afraid to criticize Obama b/c of being called racist is pretty retarded IMO. Edited June 5, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 I'll get busted for this but a large part has to do with the level of communication he has with Western leaders and friendly Eastern leaders...his reputation for multi-lateral cooperation whenever possible ( nuclear issues...economic sanctions...etc)..and (here's where it gets controversial) his Nobel speech outlining his basic philosophy that while controversial was relatively well received by most western leaders and was relatively honest (getting up and speaking about the necessity of war at a noble peace presentation lol) He's been a successful diplomat in that sense. Or they have bigger fish to fry at home than worrying about some brown people being blown up in some mountains that the news reporters don't care about anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Or they have bigger fish to fry at home than worrying about some brown people being blown up in some mountains that the news reporters don't care about anymore. That's definitely something that helps and a good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) You just misunderstand what I'm saying. Never said it was inline with his speech (although it is consistent with portions of the speech emphasized and IMO the general thrust of that speech). The point is he's been diplomatic to the point that he is doing things without an overbearing outrage from other nations...and thus he can do it more easily. As for multi-lateral cooperation IDK if you just didn't read my post or what I specifically said when he can and cited nuclear nonproliferation and economic sanctions as primary areas where he's been a leader in multi-lateral cooperation. And the idea that the international community is afraid to criticize Obama b/c of being called racist is pretty retarded IMO. He's doing it without outrage, because these tools are f'ing hypocrites of the first order. That, and now that they've been proven to be wrong...so many times...they've exhausted their cries of wolf(waterboard). And, at this point, they'd rather have the people in their countries forget their association with Obama, because they know he's about to go down, hard. Better to say nothing about him at all, than be identified with a known, political, loser, or remind people that you said he was going to be so awesome, even if now you are criticizing him. Finally, these people don't know Romney, but they think they do, and if they are running around criticizing Obama for drone strikes, they won't have anything to criticize Romney for, if he is does the same exact thing. We're on to these turds, and their endless "we won't pay to protect ourselves, and chances are we couldn't raise more than 10 divisions of soldiers from our aging, weak populace, even if we included gays and women. With only 2 of them being combat effective. We are so insecure about that, and wish so much that we were still relevant to the world, that we will irrationally criticize the US, because...WTF else are we gonna do? Admit that we are weak? No. We'll be like DeGaulle, and say that we won WW2, and that we're the ones winning the terror war, because we are more engaged with the terrorists, and willing to talk with them" delusions of grandeur. Silly "western leaders". These are the people that gave Obama a Nobel prize...for enabling their delusions, and you want to praise Obama....for that? Edit: the racist thing is precisely as ridiculous as the "tempered outrage thing"...which is why I said it. Edited June 5, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) Oh...I see...sorry to engage you on this subject. Hard to keep track of everybody sometimes but I remember now. Edited June 5, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Oh...I see...sorry to engage you on this subject. Hard to keep track of everybody sometimes but I remember now. Remember what? That I don't allow Euro-nonsense foreign policy delusions to be spewed on this board unchallenged? Look, the simple fact is you are digging for compliments for Obama with this. As if these "leaders" you speak of are ignoring Obama, and allowing him to drone strike scumbags, by Obama's design? It's all part of a larger, Obama foreign policy gambit? Please. They are ignoring him because they don't want anything to do with him. He's got nothing to offer them politically, other than to tell them to stop spending so much money, which he already did. They don't want to hear that, and they know he's a lame duck, so they are just trying to stay as far away as possible. I don't blame them. It's the only sensible thing to do politically, and as GG said, they have their own problems to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Well I'm talking about international opposition. It's not surprise that with less international outrage we'll have less domestic outrage. That one might be the other way around. When the rest of the work picks up on wall to wall Bush bashing in the US media it definitely fuels the fire of international outrage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I'll get busted for this but a large part has to do with the level of communication he has with Western leaders and friendly Eastern leaders...his reputation for multi-lateral cooperation whenever possible ( nuclear issues...economic sanctions...etc)..and (here's where it gets controversial) his Nobel speech outlining his basic philosophy that while controversial was relatively well received by most western leaders and was relatively honest (getting up and speaking about the necessity of war at a noble peace presentation lol) He's been a successful diplomat in that sense. So do you think with the leaks that have been coming from this administration that that cooperation will continue? I would think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 So do you think with the leaks that have been coming from this administration that that cooperation will continue? I would think not. The one thing I heard a military person comment on recently is that while keeping our people away and blowing up people remotely with unmanned drones is cool and fun and people can say how amazing the US is going after Al Quaeda, the amount of intelligence we've been able to gather in the past few years can fit in a fortune cookie. By the time you factor in how quickly we spill our guts about things like computer viruses hitting Iran's nuclear program, or give up doctors who give us Bin Laden's DNA, you have to figure that maybe the world isn't as smitten with the way our Sally Fields Foreign Policy has been playing out. I understand this is just a right-wing freak looking for any reason to bust Obama's balls, but I also think there's some validity to that thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 The one thing I heard a military person comment on recently is that while keeping our people away and blowing up people remotely with unmanned drones is cool and fun and people can say how amazing the US is going after Al Quaeda, the amount of intelligence we've been able to gather in the past few years can fit in a fortune cookie. By the time you factor in how quickly we spill our guts about things like computer viruses hitting Iran's nuclear program, or give up doctors who give us Bin Laden's DNA, you have to figure that maybe the world isn't as smitten with the way our Sally Fields Foreign Policy has been playing out. I understand this is just a right-wing freak looking for any reason to bust Obama's balls, but I also think there's some validity to that thinking. Bush---waterboarding a couple high up terrorists to get info and the world is in an uproar. Obama---assassinating people (along with collateral damage) and all we get is crickets. I'm not necessarily against what Obama is doing but the hypocrisy on the left is laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Bush---waterboarding a couple high up terrorists to get info and the world is in an uproar. Obama---assassinating people (along with collateral damage) and all we get is crickets. I'm not necessarily against what Obama is doing but the hypocrisy on the left is laughable. It's not that simple. TheNewBils makes a good point; Bush's administration absolutely pissed off friends and enemies alike with their 'My way and !@#$ you' attitude and there is no doubt that contributed to the level of backlash on issues like torture and Gitmo. There's no reason to be arrogant when you are the lone superpower, all that does is undermine our global authority by making others resentful and fearful. The US has been able to do anything it wanted for decades without raising this level of animosity because we were smarter diplomatically. And in a world where China, Russia, Indian, Brazil, etc. are finally getting their acts together, the US is going to have to be more conciliatory, not less if we want to continue to hold the role as global leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 6, 2012 Author Share Posted June 6, 2012 Rob Sprance @RobSprance Congratulations to the United States military for killing it’s twenty seventh No. 2 Al Qaeda leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 The one thing I heard a military person comment on recently is that while keeping our people away and blowing up people remotely with unmanned drones is cool and fun and people can say how amazing the US is going after Al Quaeda, the amount of intelligence we've been able to gather in the past few years can fit in a fortune cookie. Care to cite something that says we have no intelligence? We seem to know where to blow up #2s fairly consistently....I don't know where it is but some article I think linked form here made a comment about al-Qaeda basically feeling compromised and having not reliable means of communication anymore that they feel safe with...I wouldn't assume capturing and interrogating al-Qeda is basically our primary and sole source of intelligence... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Jon Gruden basically won a SB with the team Tony Dungy put together. Gruden will be remembered as the SB winning coach. Obviously, it's the men and women of the armed forces who got these cowards. But you have to be the biggest hater to not even give Obama any credit for this. Bush---waterboarding a couple high up terrorists to get info and the world is in an uproar. Obama---assassinating people (along with collateral damage) and all we get is crickets. I'm not necessarily against what Obama is doing but the hypocrisy on the left is laughable. This is why throwing terms like left and right are so silly IMO. There are plently of peopel who lean more left that are very happy that OBL and his crew got what they deserved. It's just stupid to lump everyone from the left in one group as it is to lump the right as Rush groupies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts