IDBillzFan Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Yes but if the American media ignores it, it doesn't really create additional problems in the Middle East. While the left loves to play "what media bias?," most thinking people know the deck is stacked with progs. And the reason the prog media gives Barry the room to FUBAR everything is because they agree -- in theory -- with what he is doing. Even as they watch evil get a solid foothold around the world, doing unspeakable things to Americans, Christians, Jews, they can't criticize Barry because they still think he'll be able to do something on the foreign policy front that doesn't begin with "...Just look at Yemen to see the success we're having." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Yes but if the American media ignores it, it doesn't really create additional problems in the Middle East. Remember how there used to be an article every week about 'Bush bombing civilians' #brownlivesmatter Yeah, but waterboarding is far worse than Barry's drone strikes, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 While the left loves to play "what media bias?," most thinking people know the deck is stacked with progs. And the reason the prog media gives Barry the room to FUBAR everything is because they agree -- in theory -- with what he is doing. Even as they watch evil get a solid foothold around the world, doing unspeakable things to Americans, Christians, Jews, they can't criticize Barry because they still think he'll be able to do something on the foreign policy front that doesn't begin with "...Just look at Yemen to see the success we're having." WALTER RUSSELL MEAD: Obama’s Foreign Policy: Media Gives President a Pass Again. Once again, be very glad we don’t have a Republican president right now. If we did, we would be treated to a merciless media pounding, night-and-day, on the series of strategic failures, mistakes and false starts that have characterized America’s war strategy in Afghanistan since 2009. We’d be getting constant reminders of how the President, who repeatedly said that this was a just war that America had to win, and who told us that we should vote for him because he wouldn’t let anything distract him from the vital task of winning said war, hasn’t managed to win it, or even end it, after six long years. Fortunately for us, there is a Democrat in the White House who, by and large, the press likes and wants to succeed. Thus our newspapers and television screens are blessedly free from invective, derision and snark when it comes to news from Afghanistan. President Obama has been permitted to fail in Afghanistan quietly and off center stage. We hear nothing anymore about the months of agonized reflection before choosing strategies that didn’t accomplish their goals. We never see mentions of his 2008 campaign rhetoric about Afghanistan—”the necessary war”—against which we might be asked to measure what has actually been achieved. He’s an affirmative-action President. Nobody expects him to produce much. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 It's "the soft bigotry of low expectations." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 (edited) Butting out is what Obama's trying. Stay out of it, fail to back up words with actions when you don't stay out of it. Then negotiate from the position of weakness you established. And THEN expect everyone else to watch out for your interests, and not take advantage of you. The very foundation of Obama's foreign policy is fundamentally unsound. Gomez Adams had a better strategy for playing the stock market. Not interested in comparing Obama's foreign policy to Bush's (although don't mind saying Bush's Iraq decision basically trumps anything)--but if you start from the premise that perpetual military involvement in an area of the world as completely and permanently ****ed as the Middle East is bad...then how can involvement on any significant level be a good idea? Personally, if we drone targets we know are international terrorists operating in that area that's one thing. Maybe we create more terrorists maybe we don't--I don't know. But anything beyond flying a drone over there and dropping a bomb seems pretty stupid. It's like seeing two idiots at the bar in a quickly escalating argument about whether God is real and trying jump in there and bring some reason to the conversation. Don't do that. If you do happen to make the mistake (and it is a mistake) of drunkenly telling them to knock it off "or else" b/c it's pissing you off...when they don't knock if off don't double down on your mistake. I mean, how anyone can sit around and talk about preserving strength in the region to negotiate and continuing to flex muscles in that region is in our best interest just makes no sense. The best interest of the U.S. is to aggressively eliminate all reasons we care about that area and then forget it exists. Occasionally we'll still show up for multi-party "negotiations" to reduce the spread of nukes and the like...that's about all that is reasonable. Even our allies over there suck. It's a **** show. Plain and simple. Don't engage in retard fights (I say this as I post on PPP) Edited May 4, 2015 by Rex'sOffense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts