Chef Jim Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 But it sure makes us feel all warm and fuzzy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 The U.S. clinching its fist worked well too. What to do... WHAT TO DO!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 He may have to put the Reset button on his "Reset" button policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 The U.S. clinching its fist worked well too. What to do... WHAT TO DO!!! Once Saddam Hussein disappeared, Guess all that fist clinching scared him into hiding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 The U.S. clinching its fist worked well too. What to do... WHAT TO DO!!! You lead from a position of percieved strength not weekness. But I could understand why a passifist, liberal, weenie such as yourself wouldn't understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 The U.S. clinching its fist worked well too. What to do... WHAT TO DO!!! Ignore them. Become self sufficient. Let them all fight amongst themselves with their petty religious/political tiffs. Including Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 You lead from a position of percieved strength not weekness. But I could understand why a passifist, liberal, weenie such as yourself wouldn't understand that. Wow. Again with the assuming you know people. Such a dumb ass. Wait a minute was that too aggressive? Ohhh I am supposed to be a pacifist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskaDarin_Has_AIDS Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 But it sure makes us feel all warm and fuzzy. CHECK IT Amazing article, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 You lead from a position of percieved strength not weekness. But I could understand why a passifist, liberal, weenie such as yourself wouldn't understand that. All of you are barking at the wind... Strength or an olive branch to communicate, calling each other names is all a waste of time with these guys. They have an agenda, they don't like us and they will use whatever they to fool their people into thinking we are the bad guys. There is such a thing as keep your mouth shut and let the rest of the world realize that they are dealing folks that are full of it no matter what we say. Leadership is stepping up when we need to and not overplaying our hands. It is high stakes poker, but it doesn't mean barking at the moon nor always folding, leadership is knowing when to do one or the other, so you right right wing ninnies and left wing apologist shut it and pray Obama knows when to act when he needs to use the hammer, but not use it a minute too soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 Wow. Again with the assuming you know people. Such a dumb ass. Wait a minute was that too aggressive? Ohhh I am supposed to be a pacifist. Yes I assumed I knew you. I assumed from your posts you were a liberal, weenie. I assumed that because that's the way you come accross. If I assumed incorrectly I'm sorry for my assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 But it sure makes us feel all warm and fuzzy. What the author seems to ignore is that fear-mongering among these dictators is all about creating internal cohesion. Obama turning down the volume has not really served the purposes of Ahmadinejad or Chavez or even N. Korea, where hatred of the US is an organizing element for nationalism. (Create and always have an external threat). Caving to the Mullahs? Hardly......it is just the right move to say little here. Remember the spy plane incident in China? Bush/US rightly said very little. It was all about Chinese internal politics. We got our plane back, business as usual. Ironically all the Iranians have had to work with recently have been John McCain's silly comments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Remember the spy plane incident in China? Bush/US rightly said very little. It was all about Chinese internal politics. We got our plane back, business as usual. Was it? Or was it about testing a new president's resolve four months into office? By coincidence, here's what has been happening three months into the Obama administration: WASHINGTON -- [On Sunday, March 9] Chinese ships surrounded and harassed a Navy mapping ship in international waters off China, at one point coming within 25 feet of the American boat and strewing debris in its path, the Defense Department said Monday. : At one point during the incident Sunday the unarmed USNS Impeccable turned fire hoses on an approaching Chinese ship in self defense, the Pentagon said. At another point a Chinese ship played chicken with the Americans, stopping dead in front of the Impeccable as it tried to sail away, forcing the civilian mariners to slam on the brakes. : Pentagon officials said the close encounter followed these other incidents last week: - On Wednesday, a Chinese Bureau of Fisheries Patrol vessel used a high-intensity spotlight to illuminate the Victorious, an ocean surveillance ship, as it operated in the Yellow Sea, about 125 nautical miles from China's coast, the Pentagon said. The next day, a Chinese Y-12 maritime surveillance aircraft conducted 12 fly-bys of Victorious at an altitude of about 400 feet and a range of 500 yards. - On Thursday, a Chinese frigate approached USNS Impeccable without warning and crossed its bow at a range of approximately 100 yards, the Pentagon said. This was followed less than two hours later by a Chinese Y-12 aircraft conducting 11 fly-bys of Impeccable at an altitude of 600 feet and a range from 100-300 feet. - On Saturday, a Chinese intelligence collection ship challenged Impeccable over bridge-to-bridge radio, calling her operations illegal and directing Impeccable to leave the area or "suffer the consequences." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/09...ational-waters/ So what is going on in Chinese internal politics that they've decided to make a bogey-man out of Obama? Nothing, I'd say. They are just deciding whether they can push him around without any real response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Was it? Or was it about testing a new president's resolve four months into office? I have no idea about the internal politics, but it was about taking advantage of an accident to gather intelligence. The Chinese certainly didn't plan on wasting a front-line fighter to damage an ELINT plane so it would land in Hainan, just so they could test President Bush. By coincidence, here's what has been happening three months into the Obama administration: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/09...ational-waters/ So what is going on in Chinese internal politics that they've decided to make a bogey-man out of Obama? Nothing, I'd say. They are just deciding whether they can push him around without any real response. No, that's been going on long before Obama took office. We send assets into the region, the Chinese shadow them. We send them into waters the Chinese claim, they harrass them. Best example of that is, coincidentally, the spyplane incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 But when a Union collectively bargains with the overture of possible job actions that often bring a company to its knees, thats OK, right? When non Union employees get "recruitment" calls at 10PM and the subtle threats fly, no problem there, right? Non Sequitur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I have no idea about the internal politics, but it was about taking advantage of an accident to gather intelligence. The Chinese certainly didn't plan on wasting a front-line fighter to damage an ELINT plane so it would land in Hainan, just so they could test President Bush. No, that's been going on long before Obama took office. We send assets into the region, the Chinese shadow them. We send them into waters the Chinese claim, they harrass them. Best example of that is, coincidentally, the spyplane incident. The monetray value to the Chinese of grabbing an ELINT plane far exceeds the cost of a fighter, both technically and politically. I would be reluctant to say that they planned it - it would take a lot of hutzpah - but it's not impossible. It would easily be worth it if one were reasonably confident of the outcome. Yes shadowing always occurs. But the active harrassment took a definite upturn this spring, just as it did 8 years ago. It is to their advantage to nuture concerns in a new administrations mind about being too provocative to China. Doing it early over something modest like this ensures that a policy of constraint is accepted immediately and that the doubts will amplify later over things like military sales and gestures of support to Taiwan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 The monetray value to the Chinese of grabbing an ELINT plane far exceeds the cost of a fighter, both technically and politically. I would be reluctant to say that they planned it - it would take a lot of hutzpah - but it's not impossible. It would easily be worth it if one were reasonably confident of the outcome. Yes shadowing always occurs. But the active harrassment took a definite upturn this spring, just as it did 8 years ago. It is to their advantage to nuture concerns in a new administrations mind about being too provocative to China. Doing it early over something modest like this ensures that a policy of constraint is accepted immediately and that the doubts will amplify later over things like military sales and gestures of support to Taiwan. Yeah, okay. Don't forget about the Chinese sub that collided with a US destroyer earlier this month, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloaggie Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 What the author seems to ignore is that fear-mongering among these dictators is all about creating internal cohesion. Obama turning down the volume has not really served the purposes of Ahmadinejad or Chavez or even N. Korea, where hatred of the US is an organizing element for nationalism. (Create and always have an external threat). Caving to the Mullahs? Hardly......it is just the right move to say little here. Remember the spy plane incident in China? Bush/US rightly said very little. It was all about Chinese internal politics. We got our plane back, business as usual. Ironically all the Iranians have had to work with recently have been John McCain's silly comments Very good points. Hitler had the jews to vent German anger at. Middle Eastern countries will always have us and Israel. It happens here too. Republicans blame Democrats, Democrats blame Republicans, Businessmen blame Politicians for their flawed policies. The best spin is always to not get baited into a war of words and let issues fade away in due time. Of course, there is always a time when action is called for, possibly with North Korea. Hopefully, Obama will build support, much like H.W. did and unlike W. did, if it comes to that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 But when a Union collectively bargains with the overture of possible job actions that often bring a company to its knees, thats OK, right? When non Union employees get "recruitment" calls at 10PM and the subtle threats fly, no problem there, right? Sorry for the late response: Collectively bargaining that often bring companies to their knees. Ok. First off, when someone receives threats from either side from the employer or from a union member that is disgusting. Secondly most organizing drives that I have been on or know of do not call people or stop by their homes at 10PM. Most of the time organizers will ask potential union members what time would be best to talk IF they are interested. Would they rather be contacted by phone or at home. And finally, do not forget about the threats that come from the employer. Threats of job loss, losing shift seniority, being threatened with violence or my personal favorite for new citizens of the U.S. ... threats of the employer calling the INS and having them revoke their citizenship. That's just good stuff there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 My brother works for the county in a non-civil service, but union job. It was "highly "recommended by the union that they attend a Gorski fundraiser if they wanted any chance of advancement in the future. My brother went for the beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Threats of job loss, losing shift seniority, being threatened with violence or my personal favorite for new citizens of the U.S. ... threats of the employer calling the INS and having them revoke their citizenship. That's just good stuff there. I've worked for unions that have done the same. "Work 80 hours a week, we're only paying you forty. If you don't, we're shipping you back to India." Like I keep saying, there's good and bad unions. Just like there's good and bad companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts