Obama's Red Line Not Even Up to Mendoza Line Standards

[3rdnlng]

Everything this administration has done in the middle east has weakened our standing and furthered future conflicts there.

 

 

http://www.commentar...as-middle-east/

 

 

I. From Bush to Obama

In the last days of George W. Bush’s presidency, the Economist delivered a damning assessment: “Abroad, George Bush has presided over the most catastrophic collapse in America’s reputation since the second world war.” In the view of the magazine’s editors, “a president who believed that America’s global supremacy was guaranteed by America’s unrivalled military power ended up demonstrating the limits of both.”

Without question, the United States paid a large price for Bush’s policies outside the United States. There were two unresolved wars, thousands of American dead, and the lingering castigations of assorted parties around the globe.

Of course all policy decisions are trade-offs, and Bush’s demonstrated not only the limits of American power but also its possibilities. In return for our sacrifices we saw al-Qaeda decimated and the American homeland secured against attack. By the time the 43rd president left office, an American-led coalition had established a flawed but democratic ally in the heart of the Muslim world. Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi, moreover, had given up his weapons of mass destruction, a development whose full benefit would be appreciated a decade later when Qaddafi’s regime fell and his conventional arms were dispersed to jihadists in North Africa.

By the end of Bush’s presidency, some saw the United States as fearless, others saw us as stumbling, and still others as dangerously belligerent. But for all the outrage about unilateralism and cowboy diplomacy, American relations in the larger Middle East functioned within long-standing diplomatic boundaries. Bush promoted freedom in the region but never jeopardized pragmatic relations with the most important autocracies and monarchies, for better or worse. Some European capitals were upset with Washington, but this caused no long-term rift in transatlantic relations.

The most tangible change brought on by Bush’s foreign policy was its domestic impact. By 2008, Americans were sick of war and tired of the Middle East

altogether. Thus, one of Barack Obama’s biggest selling points was his promise to end the war in Iraq, extricate the country from the region, and pursue a more contrite foreign policy. Once elected, President Obama set out to honor his campaign pledge. The question of his ideological disposition can be debated endlessly, but whatever its precise contours, it translated into policies that largely reversed Bush positions in the Middle East. Where Bush was particularly supportive of our closest regional ally, Obama pressured Israel for concessions. Where Bush reached out to the Iranian people in solidarity against the regime that was our chief antagonist, Obama rebuffed ordinary Iranians and offered an “open hand” to the regime itself.

Between the two poles of Israel and Iran, Obama made clear to other Middle East leaders that his main concern was staying out of their affairs. As he told the Saudi-owned Al Arabiya news station soon after taking office: “Too often the United States starts by dictating.” Unlike Bush, Obama implied, he would stand back and “listen.” And he has made good on his word to shrink American influence and undo the disruptive excesses of the Bush years.

What have we gotten in return for our more humble posture in the Middle East? The answer, as a case-by-case examination of the most important examples reveals, is this: a new age of great peril. Under Barack Obama’s leadership, in almost every square inch of the Middle East, the strategic position of the United States has decayed. And the region itself is far worse off than it was when he took office.

 

More at the above link.

Edited May 13, 2014 by 3rdnlng

[3rdnlng]

I'm bumping this thread as an argument to John Adams remarks in the Obamacare thread.

[John Adams]

So, Obama is a bad president? That's not a rebuttal.

[3rdnlng]

So, Obama is a bad president? That's not a rebuttal.

 

Did you read the entire article? Would Putin be acting the same way if Bush were in office? How differently would Bush have acted during the Benghazi fiasco? Didn't Bush try to reign in Fannie & Freddie several times and was rebuffed by the libs in Congress? Did we have any terrorist attacks after 9/11 while he was President?

[John Adams]

Did I read the entire article?

 

No.

 

Thank you for pointing out that Obama is a boob.

[Deranged Rhino]

Did I read the entire article?

 

No.

 

Thank you for pointing out that Obama is a boob.

:lol:

[keepthefaith]

Obama is a 1 issue President. Foreign policy, being commander in chief, fiscal responsibility and economic growth are not in his wheelhouse.

[B-Large]

Did you read the entire article? Would Putin be acting the same way if Bush were in office? How differently would Bush have acted during the Benghazi fiasco? Didn't Bush try to reign in Fannie & Freddie several times and was rebuffed by the libs in Congress? Did we have any terrorist attacks after 9/11 while he was President?

 

Its not a parallel comparison- Obama presides over a war fatigued nation that has finally wound down 2 almost deacdes long wars, and a Congress that showed it didn't have the stomach for authorizing force in Syria if needed. Putin is not stupid, he knows the situation in Washington, Republicans will go against Obama no matter what he decides, as evidenced by Syria... and I happen to agree with not using force there, as I am tired of gettig in the middle of these siuation as well- now if there was a strike here domestically, or a direct strike on an ally I htink they would all put politis aside and mobilize. Putin knows this, he knows where its at- he can do whatever he likes, within that fine line.

 

Given the same set of circumstances, I think Bush would be in the same position- a country tired of conflicts wihtout a clear objective.

Edited May 20, 2014 by B-Large

[3rdnlng]

Did I read the entire article?

 

No.

 

Thank you for pointing out that Obama is a boob.

 

Did you even read the snippet in the OP? That gives an assessment of Bush, and that's why I bumped this thread, well that and not wanting to discuss Bush/Obama bad in the health care thread.

[Chef Jim]

Did you even read the snippet in the OP? That gives an assessment of Bush, and that's why I bumped this thread, well that and not wanting to discuss Bush/Obama bad in the health care thread.

 

I can't even imagine discussing Bush v Obama in a Bush v Obama thread.

[3rdnlng]

I can't even imagine discussing Bush v Obama in a Bush v Obama thread.

 

This is what JA posted in the health care thread:

Posted Yesterday, 10:10 PM

keepthefaith, on 19 May 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

 

 

 

Yes if by short term you mean 500 years.

We are just about out of two idiotic wars and an economy once in shambles is relatively stable. Obamacare has not been nearly as bad as predicted mostly due to limited participation. The Mideast is as much a mess as ever. Debt and SS are ignored as ever.

 

Obama is bottom half but not nearly as bad as W, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Harding, Coolidge, Grant...all of them far ahead of Obama. W is probably the worst ever.

[Chef Jim]

This is what JA posted in the health care thread:

 

Posted Yesterday, 10:10 PM

 

keepthefaith, on 19 May 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

 

 

 

Yes if by short term you mean 500 years.

We are just about out of two idiotic wars and an economy once in shambles is relatively stable. Obamacare has not been nearly as bad as predicted mostly due to limited participation. The Mideast is as much a mess as ever. Debt and SS are ignored as ever.

 

Obama is bottom half but not nearly as bad as W, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Harding, Coolidge, Grant...all of them far ahead of Obama. W is probably the worst ever.

 

I'm sorry, did this have a point directed towards me?

[John Adams]

This is what JA posted in the health care thread:

 

Posted Yesterday, 10:10 PM

 

keepthefaith, on 19 May 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

 

 

 

Yes if by short term you mean 500 years.

We are just about out of two idiotic wars and an economy once in shambles is relatively stable. Obamacare has not been nearly as bad as predicted mostly due to limited participation. The Mideast is as much a mess as ever. Debt and SS are ignored as ever.

 

Obama is bottom half but not nearly as bad as W, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Harding, Coolidge, Grant...all of them far ahead of Obama. W is probably the worst ever.

 

Kook, who cares?

[3rdnlng]

Kook, who cares?

 

Then if nobody cares, including you, why did you post it in the first place? I merely took exception to your claim that "W" was the worst president ever and Obama not nearly as bad as "W" and the rest you named. I bumped this thread because of the very good article that I linked to in the OP that reviewed Obama's mistakes and in some instances referred to Bush's policies. If you don't want to discuss politics at PPP then why post anything here? It makes you look like Gatorman.

[John Adams]

Debating the reason why you posted something in one thread vs another is a retard fight that you are engaging in with yourself.

 

And no, I haven't read your post or your article. Un-ignoring you to engage in this conversation is annoying enough.

Edited May 20, 2014 by John Adams

[4merper4mer]

Did I read the entire article?

 

No.

 

Thank you for pointing out that Obama is a boob.

 

This is an automated response.

 

Beerboy and Poojer have alerts set up to get notified any time the word boob gets posted. Needless to say they were disappointed in your use of the word. Please use the word boob only in their desired context.

[3rdnlng]

Debating the reason why you posted something in one thread vs another is a retard fight that you are engaging in with yourself.

 

And no, I haven't read your post or your article. Un-ignoring you to engage in this conversation is annoying enough.

 

So in other words, you're arguing against something you haven't read? Gator level stupidity.

[keepthefaith]

This is an automated response.

 

Beerboy and Poojer have alerts set up to get notified any time the word boob gets posted. Needless to say they were disappointed in your use of the word. Please use the word boob only in their desired context.

 

No it's "boobs" that triggers the notification.

[Chef Jim]

No it's "boobs" that triggers the notification.

 

You obviously don't know Beerball and Pooj as well as we do. I think with them boo might be just enough.

[Dante]

Obama is incompetent can't even defend his diplomats abroad. I don't think he really cares that much about foreign affairs He has a disdain for the military and is gutting is gutting it . He certainly doesn't give a **** about the soldiers as demonstrated by his indifference to the VA problem. The Navy's tag line is that they are "A global force for good"? Hardly threatening. Putin and the rest of the world bottom feeders realize all this and feel they can make moves the might not otherwise. I mean if you had a real leader that actually gave a crap about his own country. China also continues to flex. No respect for Barry at all.