President Obama’s foreign policy is a complete failure. There’s no white-washing it, and his administration would do better to admit it than to spin the reality. That reality is:
- Iran is still closing in on starting its nuclear bomb factories (if it hasn’t already).
- Pakistan is still on verge of collapse, and
- North Korea is 100% unstoppable
There are many MANY more problems to be sure (not the least of which is the confusion over whether or not we’re all support the pursuit of success in Iraq after Obama and Democrats told us to oppose it for the past seven years). Afghanistan is the land of foreverwar. Somalia and East Africa are in anarchy, and much much more. However, those three foreign policy failures threaten not one, not two, but THREE major wars if Obama can’t produce results soon. Clocks are ticking. Nations are literally preparing for total, “all-out war.”
Obama’s foreign policy-the idea of forcing enemies to unclench their fists by offering them open hands is not producing results (could it be the Iranians are left handed?). Even Barack himself recognizes that the effort to “talk” to Iran is failing, and despite years of promising to meet Iranian leaders without preconditions, he’s announced that Iran has but till the end of the year to demonstrate considerable efforts towards peace. Israel probably doesn’t have that long, shouldn’t wait for President Obama’s pipedream, pie-in-the-sky, hail Mary effort to stave off total, all-out regional war. The Israelis are literally facing the threat of another genocide. They know it, and because Obama’s foreign policy has not produced a single positive result with Iran, there is no practical reason to wait. War is coming to the Middle East-a war that will make the invasion and occupation of Iraq look like kids play.
In Pakistan, President Obama’s stepped up air strikes and Special Forces raids have killed so many civilians that locals actually look at Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban more favorably! They’re backing the Taliban’s offensive that is threatening to collapse that country. If Pakistan falls to extremists or collapses into anarchy, then a war with India is very likely. Any war with India threatens 1-2 billion people with nuclear Armageddon. Obama’s efforts to prevent this have produced zero results. He must change the course of events.
In regards to North Korea, even the BBC is admitting now that nothing shy of total war will stop the unchained dictatorship. No amount of sanctions, no harsh letter from the UN, no speech about fake outrage is going to stop or even deter the weapons exporting nation. They’re military is among the biggest and most dedicated in the world, and while armed with antiquated weapons, their artillery alone could kill 2million people in the South Korean capital at any given moment. If North Korea is not stopped (and it doesn’t look like Obama’s charm can do it), then a regional arms race must begin. Japan must build anti-ballistic missiles, and perhaps even nuclear weapons. China must then increase its abilities with both. The chain reaction proliferation threatens billions of lives. It would be far cheaper in blood and treasure for the world to lose a million troops in an attack into North Korea than to lose a billion or two billion to a regional nuclear war, and if Obama’s charm doesn’t start paying off soon, history will make the decision.
We’re told, “These things take time.” No. They don’t. It’s very easy to see if one side of a conversation is interested, willing, or even capable of barter. Once that’s determined, then the ugly balance sheet must come out. There’s no way around it. He has to ask himself what is the cost of inaction vs what is the cost of action-however horrific. In each of the three cases above (Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea), the price of inaction far outweighs the cost of direct military attack. That’s why it’s so important for diplomacy to work, to start showing results, and to stop being reduced to a Monty Python joke.
“STOP! Or we shall be forced to say ‘stop’ again!”
See author page
“open hearts, open minds, fair-minded words.”
This is a serious geopolitical chess game and our C.I.C. is still trying to figure out how the “horsie” moves! Soon we will get tested on multiple fronts with Iran, N, Korea and and an imploding Pakistan.
The first order of the day is to locate, secure and neutralize Pakistan’s strategic weapons, Eg; Nuclear and ballistic. Unfortunately the only realistic way to do this is by co-opting the Pakistani air corps. or destroying the jets on the ground a la IDF 1973 war. Serious special ops are required with major logistics and forward support. This is a difficult task at best. We will be hated by the locals for this and we will be fighting not just the Taliban but the entire populace. A total mess will be the result. We had it good with Musharraf and now with a de-fanged elected govt which has no real control of the armed forces there is no cohesive command structure in place there. When I look at Pakistan I see South Viet- Nam – Feb. 1975 Imminent collapse is unavoidable. India will give us all of the Intel we need but it appears our C.I.C. is asleep at the wheel on this.
The better option is to delay the inevitable by getting behind a strong civilian and or military leader who has the cojones to finish the job with the Taliban or at least roll them back to Waziristan. Pakistani intelligence services (ISI) have to be scrubbed of all Taliban sympathizers in order for this to work out.
N.korea has to be dealt with through Chinese pressure and this is the only way to bring them to heel. This is a very difficult game as China hold all of the cards and we have none left to play. We must make sure China understands that all business ends if there is any conflagration on the Korean front. A push for unification is the only solution with major payoffs to Kim Il and his cohorts. It must be done now.
Iran is a different story entirely and the best option is to delay at all cost their rush to be a nuclear power and Vladimir Putin is the man that needs to be talked to regarding this task The generational gap in Iran is working against the Mullocracy as 70% of the populace is under 30 and few in this age group have any interest in continuing the regimes polices, Most are pro-western and we must not alienate this generation. With some luch “Ahm a doin a jihad” will lose the election, however, they want to stir the stew of warfare with Israel before that happens. and He will most likely get re-elected and ramp up the hostilities to jack up the price of oil to over $120.00 a barrel . if he cannot. the regime collapses from financial meltdown within 2-3 years.
He’s a novice manager of an amateur team playing at the professional playoffs level. The core of his foreign policy (and all policies really) is to distract when the press even starts to get critical.
alan carrier:
Excellent analysis of the Pretender in Chief. His re-election will most likely not happen due to his mis-handling of the Economy and his total lack of any management skills in both domestic & foreign venues. The is the most inept, divisive and partisan President ever. America can survive perhaps four years of Obama but not eight. Our only hope is to take away the bullet proof Socialist Majority in the Congress & Senate in 2010 to reduce the harm that he is capable of doing.
Hey Scott, you have the Pretender pegged as well. So far the only transparency in his Administration is his desire to render America weak, bankrupt and Socialist in an almost Stalinist model. Individual Rights, Rights to Private Property as well as American Traditional Values & the Bill of Rights are under attack under the Pretender’s reign of Terror. It will take more than Tea Parties to stop this tyranny. Cutting Defense spending right now is just incredibly treasonous on his part with the current threat picture out there.
The appointment of Liberal Activist Judge Sonia Sotomayor to SCOTUS is just further illustration of the potential erosion for Due Process under Obama’s vision of the destruction of America.
Obama will hope it all goes away. It is the magial thinking of liberalism that dominates Obama policy-making. Yes, it means we are in for some tough, really tough, days, unless Obama changes his thinking. That is also daunting: what if he sees an international emergency as a reason to suspend the Constitution, bomb the crap HIS enemies offshore, and then turn guns onto domestic enemies?
Exchanged emails w someone today who said they hope that North Korea can be contained and left to wither like the Soviets during the Cold War. Let China deal w em. Man….talk about a 1 move chess player. TWO MOVES would require a realization that the one move is not gonna work without a full on blockade/act of war, and the second move would be…war. Even if it didn’t spark a war, DPRK can’t be contained. What’re you gonna do? Shoot down every cargo plane that leaves? And when they fly into China, then out of China to their destination…ya gonna shoot em down then?
North Korea is not containable without a war-PERIOD. Next idea? What…there are no more?
Oh, I see, we HOPE things will CHANGE
Scott –
Add this:
Russia Is Coordinating With Iran As They Move Warships Into The Persian Gulf
http://tinyurl.com/osofre
Venezuela And Bolivia Supplying Iran With Uranium
http://tinyurl.com/pb4q9p
This ain’t George Bush’s mess anymore …
Apparently the “community organizer” can’t handle the world’s “clutter”
Grabbing this post of yours, BTW and linking to it on my site. Exceptional!
http://www.rferl.org/content/transcript_RFERL_Interviews_US_Central_Command_Chief_General_David_Petraeus/1738626.html
These problems were around while Bush was in office, and Bush didn’t solve them, in fact they got worse. Perhaps some folks should take their argument’s about the Middle East’s problems and closing Gitmo up with General David Petraeus and let’s hear you call him the same stupid anti American pretender that they call our President. Obama and Petraeus seem to be on the same page, as is Sec Gates.
https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/press-release-archive-2008/cia-director-hayden-announces-findings-on-covert-syrian-reactor.html
Those who think Iran is a bigger threat than N Korea are crazy, N Korea is probably exporting and selling their weapons and technology to undesirables right now, and probably have been for years while Bush was in charge. You see the progress in their Nuke program since they did the last underground Nuke test while Bush did nothing…nothing, and chose to try and isolate N Korea while they get a bomb as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb going and work out the missles to deliver them. Bush was unable to get China involved, and we better pray that Obama can and does not “fail”, lest we all pay too high a price the inept Bush strategy and the deadly fruit it is bearing now.
Only a bit over 4 months in and some expect Obama to immediately solve the problems that Bush had for years and didn’t solve? Fortunately, most Americans have more sense than that. Some are very anxious for Obama to own all the failures of the Bush years as fast as possible, for strictly political reasons. When your reduced to that as your best defensive posture after being soundly rejected at the polls, well, best of luck with that agenda. Obama will in time own all these problems, and will face judgement by The People, but only after he is given a fair chance to deal with the issues.
Yeah, they were problems while Pres. Bush was in office … But he didn’t just issue Thesaurus riddled statements from the White House talking heads. The fact(s) are in Korea and in Iran we did exactly (under Bush) what the democrats (see: John Kerry, for one) and anti “unilateral Iraq War” bitchers were touting FOR with Iraq … multi-party talks with our “allies” intow … and in both cases we. got. nowhere.
After the weekend launch of the missiles (which I would believe our government/intel KNEW was coming) on the heels of the last missile launch we should have had our ship the USS Lake Erie in position and shot the sonofabitch out of the sky … on top of that the nuke test??? PLEASE!
So, they telegraph a day or so ago there would be another missile launch … Bush would have had ships steaming into that part of the Pacific (yeah, I know that launch was on their west coast) … Still, we have a responsibility to our allies there … not to mention our damn mouthy Speaker Of The House is in China.
It’s not about how long these troubles with NKorea and Iran have been stewing, but how it’s handled … and to continually rely on strong words and cricking your finger at the U.N. for meaningless ‘sanctions’ is fodder for people like Kim Jong Il and the Iranian troll to laugh over in their next conference call.
I know what might help, perhaps if Obama makes a trip to SKorea and apologizes for the Korean War?
Why is this scene from a movie popping into my mind?
The clueless POTUS unclenches his fist and offers it to the “hell-bent on destruction” pint-sized tyrant after a pretty-worded speech:
http://tinyurl.com/pnamso
Re: Mooseburger
Still blaming bush? When does this cheap cop out end? give us a time and date!
NKorea’s Il:
Take two in the morning and one at night and call me in the morning, Obama:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/n-korea-launches-another-missile-yonhap-reports-20095261841580
mooseburger…do You really believe that nonsense?
Maybe you can learn something from a few folks that are not so readilly and easily confused by left wing propaganda or the stuff that Obama or Pravda fed you.
You are smarter than that….
moose is correct that Iran, N. Korea and Pakistan were a problem during the Bush admin. He is incorrect that it became “worse”, or that it has anything to do with Dubya.
Musharraf was a US loss… but then, Moose.. you do remember how that happened, yes? The liberal nanny press spents months rewriting Benazir’s history and canonizing her, and at the same time demonizing Musharraf. Benazir – corrupt and creator of Mullah Omar’s Taliban – was the shining light of Pakistani democracy according to the liberal think tanks. Yeah, right… only in revisionist history.
I knew, and have said over and over, that Pakistan was going to be the largest problem for the next admin as of the 2008 election of Zardari, and the coalition government there finally forcing Musharraf out. We need them as allies. Obama’s promises to step up the pressure and military force on an ally was never going to work, and merely push them further away. And that, Moose, is not Bush’s fault. Alan has the analysis entirely correct.
He’s also spot on with Iran. It is a time game, waiting for the more modern and westernized youth to seize control of their nation and boot out the old regimes. This is why I laughed my tuckus off when the left kept spreading the rumours Bush would bomb Iran before he left office. He knew very well it was a different story than Iraq or Afghanistan. Why bomb when you can encourage rebellion among the young, and stall Iran’s progress by getting the int’l community to play their “we care, we really do” game in diplomacy.
N. Korea? Always a mess, will always be a mess without another Korean War. Clinton/Madeline Not-So-Bright tried unilateral talks. Bush tried multi-lateral talks. And Maggie’s is exactly right… these were liberal Dem and Obama solutions. Been there, done that. But it held the little bastard at bay for awhile. Become worse under Bush, Moose? Only in your partisan dreams.
Talks stalled after Jong fell ill last fall, and negotiators started taking a more hard line approach. Instead of Obama picking up the ball and running with multilateral talks, he did nothing but talk about eliminating nuke arms.
Personally I think the stubby NK king is just doing a repeat of 2006… and upping the stakes. He’s into financial blackmail, and uses his nuclear program to do just that. I suspect Obama will send Hillary over to the negotiating table soon, with carrots in hand, and another cycle of deceit and lies will begin. US blackmail has one positive effect… makes it less likely he sells this stuff on the black market as quickly. Altho I highly suspect the Syrian plant bombed by Israel last year was NK leftovers.
If one wants to point fingers at Bush for not doing enough to stop DPRK, I’d agree, but I’d go further and recall the covers of TIME, USNews, and Newsweek from 1993, 1994, and 1996…all of which had titles like “SHOWDOWN” “WAR IMMINENT” “WHAT WILL IT LOOK LIKE” “CAN KIM BE STOPPED” and more. I’d also point to the oxymoron of “successful talks” w DPRK by showing a pic of Madeline Albright and Kim Il Jong. Presidents kick the ball down the road, and if one wants to finger Bush, they’ve GOT to finger Clinton even more. Till someone on the left can show the cranial courage to do that….it’s Obama’s problem. He sought it for 2yrs. Promised he’d have a peaceful solution for 2yrs, and he promised he’d be ready to lead on Day 1.
My only question is what date has he picked to be day 1?
The Chinese have a saying:
To avoid making a choice is to make a choice.
These problems have been going back through several administrations, and to blame the Bush Administration is narrow minded. During the Clinton administration’s first term they were negotiating with the North Koreans at about the time that Kim Jong Il took over for his father. Jimmy Carter decided to freelance, and undercut the Clinton administration’s efforts. Would Clinton have succeeded? Probably not, but a member of Clinton’s cabinet referred to Carter as “…a treasonous pr**k” due to his meddling. Basically, Clinton was President, and it was his responsibility to deal with the situation.
These problems pre-date Clinton; in fact, we’re technically still at war with North Korea, as the only document that was signed in 1953 was a cease fire, not an end to the hostilities. Google “Operation Paul Bunyan” to see how hot the cold war got in Korea during peacetime.
FWIW, I think Obama is overwhelmed, and that by ignoring it, things will magically solve themselves. There’s no adult around to help him out, and now the world will pay the price.
Baby Kim will keep upping the ante daily. Next will be a DMZ incursion or a kidnapping and no doubt, a naval incident a la USS Pueblo. Short range rockets over Japan. the menu is endless! What will our C.I.C. do then? Oh, I forgot! the United Nations! they can fix it!
Old Trooper and Mata:
I think it is beyond doubt that in N Korea their Nuke threat has indeed gotten worse, as their ability to build the bigger Nuke, more nukes, deliver them with longer and longer range missiles, and potential of exporting the technology to our enemies has been increased, not only in the last 4 months of Obama, but for a number of years. These aren’t my “Partisan Dreams” Mata, and to state this has nothing to do with Bush, well, I don’t know whose watch we were under while 95% of this (NK nuke and missile testing) was going on besides Bush, do you? Could anyone anywhere do anything about it? Who knows, maybe only China, but this post isn’t calling Bush’s Policies a failure though, only Obama’s.
It is also beyond doubt that AQ has moved lock, stock, and barrel into Pakistan and all the US tax money sent there for the last 6-7 years has NOT been used soley to thwart the Taliban and AQ. Osama is still alive and free. Much of this US tax dollars was spent for use as a buildup against India. Musharif was a shaky ally at best. Gen Petraeus is in charge over there for the Military, and he and Obama seem to be in sync. Let us hope they can get this under some semblance of control, and that AQ does not ever gain control of those Nukes over there. Are folks wanting to call a failure of Foreign policy on Obama after only 4 month’s and then defend the last 8 years under Bush?
And why is it always the Liberal Press’s fault when an election turns out different than some folks would like? Perhaps the Pakistani people had issues with Musharif like arresting and detaining their Supreme court justices and holding them under house arrest when they were about to rule on his ability to be head of the military and the president at the same time and many other very undemocratic moves he made against their own constitution.
To paint Obama’s short time in office and his foreign policy decisions under the heading “While Obama Foreign Policies Fail, Major Wars Creeping Closer” is to lay the blame all on Obama and shift the focus from the circumstances during the time under Bush that have led to where we are now. That seems a good example to me of “partisan Dreaming.” We all pray that major wars will not happen and cost the lives of our Sons and Daughters. Most problems that are years and years in the making don’t get solved overnight. Bush owns what he owns, and so will Obama.
Simply saying “He is incorrect that it became “worse”, or that it has anything to do with Dubya.” in my opinion anyway, is not correct. The only way you could say it is not “worse is if you are advocating conditions conducive for war to happen, and the only way you could say it has nothing to do with Bush is to say….well, I don’t know how you could really say that…Your willing to lay so much blame on Obama already, and two full terms of Bush and you say these problems getting worse don’t have anything do do with him? Is that a double standard?
The Bush era of foreign policy is already written in terms of where we are today, and Obama is just a short 4 months in…..as I stated above, “Obama will in time own all these problems, and will face judgement by The People, but only after he is given a fair chance to deal with the issues”.
So which is it, Moose. You call it Bush’s fault because it happened under Bush’s watch, but Obama will only own this after given a fair chance to deal with the issues.
What a bunch of horse manure. The BS is flying thick around here.
You ignore the fact that the Clinton admin turned it’s back on NK after their unilateral chit chats, and they were proliferating under their noses. They did not get to their 2006 bomb test by just starting their program on Inauguaration Day, 2001.
Bush dealt with NK with diplomacy… as all the nannny, global community types demanded. Only Bush, seeing that Clinton’s unilateral approach didn’t work, brought in NK’s close allies to add pressure. Did that work? Hang no… nothing’s going to keep Kim Jong from pulling the blackmail stunt whenever he gets the itch.
And I love how so many like to justify the media push to demonize Musharraf by calling him a “shake ally” at best. You want to see shakey? Have a gander now, bubba. Musharraf bucked many of his own to have under the table cooperation with the US. This current ruling faction of Pakistan has no where near the cajones.
What you like to forget is when Bush took office, Pakistan was a nuclear armed enemy. That they are any kind of ally now is because of George W. Bush. That they will become some form of an ostracized ally (or enemy) in the future is all on your boy.
Lastly, I didn’t write this post, nor the headline. Nor is it a headline I *would* have written. I don’t blame Bush for NK, and I don’t blame Obama for this latest bomb test. What I *do* blame Obama for is doing absolutely nothing about it for four months after talks had stalled, and Kim Jong was back in what appears to be fit as a fiddle form. He ignored the continued talks, did nothing to pressure them back to the table. And that is not something you can blame Bush for with an ounce of credibility.
RPL: FWIW, I think Obama is overwhelmed, and that by ignoring it, things will magically solve themselves. There’s no adult around to help him out, and now the world will pay the price.
A POTUS is only as good as those he chooses to surround himself with.
Obama has chosen political hacks and thugs, only interested in “strutting” their socialist agenda into the office, and campaigning for the next election. Or, in Biden’s case, supplying material for NBC’s SNL.
Not a one of those surrounding him have the convictions and the foresight to ante-up in this game NKorea (and Iran) are dealing … and looks now like Russia also (throwing in with Iran). These world players remind me of the classroom when the teacher steps out and the kids have a free for all, some choosing to “shoosh!” and “warn” sternly from their desks … while others just sit back in their desks and hope when the crap hits the fan upon the teacher’s re-entry they are seen sitting passively with their books cracked open as if in study mode. With Obama and Co. in office the adult has left the room, it would appear.
No wonder the left is seething over Dick Cheney’s recent outspokenness … Makes their guy look all the more immature and faux.
I gotta wonder what’s going on in the minds of our military leaders right now …
Mata said: “You ignore the fact that the Clinton admin turned it’s back on NK after their unilateral chit chats, and they were proliferating under their noses. They did not get to their 2006 bomb test by just starting their program on Inauguaration Day, 2001.”
“So which is it, Moose. You call it Bush’s fault because it happened under Bush’s watch, but Obama will only own this after given a fair chance to deal with the issues.
What a bunch of horse manure. The BS is flying thick around here.”
I did mention “Could anyone anywhere do anything about it? Who knows, maybe only China, but this post isn’t calling Bush’s Policies a failure though, only Obama’s.” I also said “Most problems that are years and years in the making don’t get solved overnight. Bush owns what he owns, and so will Obama.”
Let’s be honest here, the Bush foreign policy had some failures, the same failures that this post is calling Obama’s failures regarding N Korea. Most folks are sensible enough to realize that Bush really didn’t have a great ability to do much about N korea, and I cited Bush’s failures in response to the critcism of Obama: “While Obama Foreign Policies Fail, Major Wars Creeping Closer”
Obama has the same options unless he can get China to drop the hammer, and he sure hasn’t had two terms to get that done yet.
Then you bring up Clinton, I hear this alot about 911 being all on Clinton, now it’s N Korea.
I guess some feel that Clinton and Obama bear the blame for our troubles, and Bush somehow was just doing his best to cope with some of the problems that were left to him….hey, wait a minute, that sounds familiar…..
Mata said: “And I love how so many like to justify the media push to demonize Musharraf by calling him a “shake ally” at best. You want to see shakey? Have a gander now, bubba. Musharraf bucked many of his own to have under the table cooperation with the US. This current ruling faction of Pakistan has no where near the cajones.”
“What you like to forget is when Bush took office, Pakistan was a nuclear armed enemy. That they are any kind of ally now is because of George W. Bush. That they will become some form of an ostracized ally (or enemy) in the future is all on your boy.”
Should Obama continue to send Billions of our Tax dollars to Pakistan to “buy” an ally like Musharrif, who would not even let our troops cross over the border to get the terrorist? You don’t really think that Musharrif would have been any kind of ally if we didn’t send him the $ do you? Bush rightly realized that we must have Pakistan on our team, but an ally you need to pay Billions to for them to be of help, then don’t even spend most of it on the purpose of what the American taxpayers sent it for, I would call that a bit shaky, as soon as we quit coughing up the dough, they would probably quit doing what very little they were doing.
“That they are any kind of ally now is because of George W. Bush” should also include “because of George W Bush and billions of American tax payer dollars.” Sometimes distasteful things have to be done to win a war, Bush took what he could get from Pakistan. Half a loaf is better than none. I do hope Gen Petraeus and Obama can come up with a way to win this war and get us out of there, and yes, it will take some time to figure out the best moves to make and put it all in place. Then we can see how the Obama strategy works or doesn’t work, until then, give the man a chance before you declare failure.
Why yes, Moose… I do. I support giving US tax dollars aid to allies for a fight that involves our national security. It is the prime directive of the federal government… to defend our people, not to make sure you have health insurance.
And I most certainly support those dollars going to aid Pakistan, an ally, more than I support Obama’s money to Hamas in Gaza. ooops….
Nor should US boots on the ground cross into Pakistan and invade their sovereignty. I wouldn’t want the Pakistanis coming into the US to hunt stray Taliban either. However Musharraf has given the silent nod to US predator and air strikes, then taken the brunt of it with the Pakistanis… to which he would then give the token admonitions to the US. It’s the way it worked, Moose. All show. And for his underground US support, he endured assassination attempts, threats on his life, and ultimately the loss of his position and respect of the Pakistanis. And that is why Zardari does not do the same. Obama, in the still of the night and confronted with reality, must long for the days of Musharraf.
I brought up Clinton because you brought up NK as Bush’s fault. You needed a historic reminder of the first failed unilateral negotiations. You said Bush made it worse. I made it quite plain that Bush stayed on top of NK, while the previous admin did not. You said it happened on Bush’s watch, and therefore it was his fault. Yet you want to give Obama some time before you assign him any responsibility because he inherited the problem… just as Bush inherited it from Clinton.
But as many have pointed out, NK goes back decades… not just these mentioned admins. However these admins were dealing with a potential and inevitable nuclear NK. Hence the difference.
So… in essence… you forced the Clinton issue yourself.
This post… which is not mine… does hold Obama solely responsible for the blame. I have already stated that I do not hold Obama responsible for NK’s latest test, but I do hold him accountable for ignoring getting NK back to the negotiating table with multilateral talks. And, to use your constant fallback excuses, this all happened on Obama’s watch.
Mata said: “And I most certainly support those dollars going to aid Pakistan, an ally, more than I support Obama’s money to Hamas in Gaza. ooops….”
I tend to agree with you there too, I hate to see Hamas getting money from us, except for this too is another real world problems that Mr. Bush had a hand in bringing about. Does Bush get a pass as well for calling for those elections that Brought Hamas to power, after being warned by Israeli officials not to?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012601009.html
An excerpt from the artice:
“The Bush administration has spent nearly $500 million in the past year to bolster the Palestinian Authority and the ruling Fatah party, which was nonetheless crushed by Hamas at the polls. Against the advice of Israeli officials, the administration had pushed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to hold the elections without delay, believing that the voting would strengthen his hand in disarming militia groups. Instead, the plan backfired, and an organization that has claimed credit for dozens of suicide bombings — some resulting in the deaths of Americans — is poised to take power.”
Mata said: “Nor should US boots on the ground cross into Pakistan and invade their sovereignty. I wouldn’t want the Pakistanis coming into the US to hunt stray Taliban either.”
That’s a tough call there, let’s see, Pakistan doesn’t want us invading their sovereignty, that’s one way to look at it. Another way is the Bush Doctrine, “We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” We may have made a distinction with Pakistan, knowing that Bin Laden and his filthy ilk were just over the border and Musharrif would not let us clean up the filth who were responsible for killing 3000 Americans on 911, instead, like I said before we got that half a loaf at least. I trust that Bush would have went in and got the Basta**s if he could have, but again, Bush gets a pass here, and Obama gets nothing but contempt at every turn from some (and that last comment is not directed at you Mata)
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=44910
Mata said: “I brought up Clinton because you brought up NK as Bush’s fault. You needed a historic reminder of the first failed unilateral negotiations. You said Bush made it worse.
Well, let me be a bit more clear with my intent here, Mata. My intent of what I said is if Obama is to be judged a failure because of what NK has done this week, then Bush has some, or even more fault with his NK policies, and had two terms to deal with this issue. I didn’t mean in any way to imply that NK is ALL Bush’s fault, and I don’t believe that I did. Saying that it got worse under Bush, and saying “Bush made it worse” is a distinction that I can understand, the first being a passive enabler, or perhaps just really not having the tools needed to solve the NK problem. Saying Bush made it worse is saying Bush actively promoted NK to be on the road their on. Some libs will say the “Axis or evil” speech was Bush causing NK to act up, but, I don’t buy that, that freaking nutjob would find some reason to act up and draw attention so he can get more hand outs for his failed state.
I was going to bring up Clinton earlier in the thread, because I thought perhaps it would come up as a defense for Bush, but I thought better of it and tried to stay on topic. Clinton was dealing with a nutjob leader who wanted to make nukes. Bush was dealing with a nutjob leader who exploded a Nuke underground, and shot a missile over Japan. That was a new level of threat, demonstrated and in your face. Bush couldn’t get China to step in and drop the hammer on NK. We sure don’t want a war with China, or anybody, unless it is imperative. The disease (NK) is pretty bad, but if the cure is much much worse (war with China) then Bush had his hands tied at that point.
Mata said: “but I do hold him accountable for ignoring getting NK back to the negotiating table with multilateral talks. And, to use your constant fallback excuses, this all happened on Obama’s watch.”
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/UN_unanimously_condemns_NKorean_nuc_05252009.html
“In April the North fired a long-range rocket for what it called a satellite launch. Many nations saw it as a disguised ballistic missile test, while the Security Council condemned the launch and tightened sanctions.
A defiant North vowed to conduct a second nuclear test as well as more ballistic missile launches unless the world body apologised.
It also announced that it was quitting the six-way talks and would restart its plutonium-making programme.”
N Korea withdrew from the 6 way talks Mata, after the condemnation from their “Satellite” launch. Obama may well have been trying to bring them back to the table and not ignoring the issue. Yep, it happened on his watch, now lets see if he can get China and Russia to be part of the solution…..
Oh, so now Hamas bombing Israel, and Israel defending herself, is Bush’s fault too? And Bush is responsible for Hamas’ coup, seizing the Gaza strip and dividing the coalition PA alliance? Have you the briefest clue to the timeline of events and history? Or are you just picking up a link or two here and there to try and justify your pointless assumptions?
Then you compare Pakistan and Iraq or Afghanistan with your reference to the Bush Doctrine. A not-so-clever way to say that Bush’s idea was to overthrow every country that aided the jihad movements. This of course means you don’t get the difference between Pakistan, which has elections, and Afghanistan/Iraq which had nothing close to a genuine election. Even the PA had a genuine election where the Palestinians chose Hamas’ welfare programs. They did not, however, vote to be seized in a coup a short time later.
Afghanistan was run by Bhutto’s Taliban, brutalized their people, and were not a recognized government. Regime change in Iraq – another self-installed tryant – has been US policy since under Bill Clinton in the mid-90s. Get the difference?
And let me get this straight, you want to respond about Obama’s culpability so you bring up Bush. But when someone brings up Clinton’s culpability as a response about Bush, you get all a’rile about the Clinton-Obama bashing. Blow the dirt out of your Moose ears and listen to your own arguments first.
And that includes the step up in NK’s ability. You seem to think that Bush was worse because NK was more developed in 2006 with a bomb. And how the heck do you think they got that far? By proliferating under the noses of the entire world while they were supposedly in a treaty with Clinton/Not-So-Bright.
So it’s less serious for Clinton because NK didn’t have the more advanced capability that they did under Bush. Boy oh boy… remember you said that, Moose. Because that’s going to come back and haunt you when Iran has their nukes under Obama’s watch, and you’re going to blame Bush for letting it get that far. And once again, I will have to remind you of history.
Took you long enuf…. geeez. But what’s this “Obama may well have…” bit? Did you hear any news of Obama or Hillary making any attempts there? Don’t think it would make the news?
And wouldn’t you find that very odd that it didn’t make the news when Obama was fully engaged in his campaign promises of getting our adversaries to the table?
Dreaming, dude.
BTW, Moose… I forgot to mention:
First, it’s the media’s fault when they deliberately mislead, misinform and revise history in order to influence an election… any country’s. And the Bhutto canonization was not only US press, but all western press. The media is charged with keeping us informed. They are not charged with the duty to spread propaganda.
Secondly, the “issues” of Musharraf and martial law after booting out the justices…. I might want to remind you that it was only this past month or so that those justices were returned to their seats of judicial power. A *year* after the election. Why so long? Zardari saw the reasoning for booting them out. Rather like Obama using Gitmo and military tribunals as a campaign talking point, then continuing on with not only those, but indefinite detention after assuming power.
The only reason Zardari reinstated the judges was because the riots in the streets were about to happen again. His choice was to cave, or do the same thing Musharraf did… call for emergency law. He did what he does best with the Taliban… caved.
However Zardari has chosen that martial law route himself… in March INRE the problems when the Sharif brotherss and the Punjab contested elections. Please note that he did this against his political opposition, but he doesn’t wield that aggression against the militant jihad movements.
Mata said: “Oh, so now Hamas bombing Israel, and Israel defending herself, is Bush’s fault too? And Bush is responsible for Hamas’ coup, seizing the Gaza strip and dividing the coalition PA alliance? Have you the briefest clue to the timeline of events and history? Or are you just picking up a link or two here and there to try and justify your pointless assumptions?”
Hamas was a terrorist organization long before that election. Is Bush responsible for Hamas’ actions? No. Did Bush blunder when he pushed for those elections? Yes, and he was warned about the possible outcome. Facilitating Hamas rise as a duly elected representative only complicates the issue and was a bad move, democratically elected or not.
Mata said: “Then you compare Pakistan and Iraq or Afghanistan with your reference to the Bush Doctrine. A not-so-clever way to say that Bush’s idea was to overthrow every country that aided the jihad movements. This of course means you don’t get the difference between Pakistan, which has elections, and Afghanistan/Iraq which had nothing close to a genuine election. Even the PA had a genuine election where the Palestinians chose Hamas’ welfare programs. They did not, however, vote to be seized in a coup a short time later.”
Look Mata, Bush himself said he would make no distinction, I didn’t hear him say anything about countries with free elections could harbor terrorists, and those who don’t have free elections can’t. Osama and AQ went into Pakistan, Bush did what he could, but couldn’t keep his word about the Doctrine. You call out Obama on his rhetoric and the reality later when he has to back off of it, and I’m not knocking you for that either, just realize that Bush has his share of that too and this is a case in point.
Mata said “And let me get this straight, you want to respond about Obama’s culpability so you bring up Bush. But when someone brings up Clinton’s culpability as a response about Bush, you get all a’rile about the Clinton-Obama bashing. Blow the dirt out of your Moose ears and listen to your own arguments first.”
“And that includes the step up in NK’s ability. You seem to think that Bush was worse because NK was more developed in 2006 with a bomb. And how the heck do you think they got that far? By proliferating under the noses of the entire world while they were supposedly in a treaty with Clinton/Not-So-Bright.”
“So it’s less serious for Clinton because NK didn’t have the more advanced capability that they did under Bush. Boy oh boy… remember you said that, Moose. Because that’s going to come back and haunt you when Iran has their nukes under Obama’s watch, and you’re going to blame Bush for letting it get that far. And once again, I will have to remind you of history.”
First off, yeah, if some, and I know you said not you, but some folks want to call Obama’s foreign policy a failure after 4 months when Bush had 8 years, and yes, the next phase of terror capability came when NK set off the first Nuke with Bush at the helm, then I think I should bring up how Bush compares, Obama has about 5% of the time in office to deal with these problems than Bush had. By that standard, if Obama has failed, then Bush flunked out, dropped out, and has a dunce hat collection in his closet at home. As for Clinton, no, not riled at all about that, but just seems like some folks want to blame Clinton and Obama, and give W a pass. Clinton owns his failures, and his NK failure, although allowing the quest for Nukes to continue, was where the dialog had to start, with negotiations. If a nuke would have been set off during the Clinton years, the conservatives would have been blasting Clinton to Kingdom come and we would have heard no end of it. I don’t know how you get around it Mata, and I’ll say it again, hopefully you will understand what and how I’m saying it; The situation in N Korea got worse under George W Bush. I didn’t say he made it worse, I said it got worse. NK light up a nuke, and fired some missiles, one at least over Japan. There were reports that Syria’s reactor was made with parts and know how from NK. That is spreading potential WMD’s to the Middle East. That was an aggressive uptick in their bad behavior, did Bush do any better than Clinton at stopping NK? Nope. Do you, Mata, want to put all that blame for the later behaviour of NK on Clinton, and absolve Bush because Clinton failed to reign NK in and get it stopped? I just don’t understand how you can claim it didn’t get worse while Bush was in Office.
We’re told, “These things take time.” No. They don’t. It’s very easy to see if one side of a conversation is interested, willing, or even capable of barter. Once that’s determined, then the ugly balance sheet must come out. There’s no way around it. He has to ask himself what is the cost of inaction vs what is the cost of action-however horrific.
The lessons of the Rhineland in 1936 and the Sudetenland in 1938 are lost on Obama (he would do the same thing). While it would have cost lives to stop Hitler in 1936 or even 1938, it would have saved millions more. Just like the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed 250-300 thousand, they saved millions more. Just as timely intervention in force in 1920 in Russia (the US and Great Britain made a feeble attempt, but were war weary) could have saved the millions who died of forced collectivization and during the purges in the cellars and in the gulag. Those are the lessons of the balance sheet of History, lessons Obama has, as far as it is Marxisitly possible, studiously avoided.
Obama and the Democrats need to understand the following:
North Korea would have no qualms whatsoever with selling small tactical nukes to any terrorist group willing to give them the money. Iran on the other hand would give them away.
It’s as simple as that. They need to get their pacifist craniums out of their neither-region orifices and deal with it. The problem is that “they can’t handle the truth.”