The Obama Doctrine
- Thread starter UCFEE
- Start date
That's all good and well, but when others know you won't hold them to their promises, they will promise you anything. Syria is still employing chemical weapons, Cuba is still persecuting people for anti-Castro speech, as is North Korea, Iran is doing whatever it wants to, and Russia watched the US destroy a good portion of nuclear deterrent and laughed while doing nothing that they promised. To count these empty promises as victories is to ignore reality. Except that the US people have the attention span of a gnat so it will probably work out in his favor.
TLDR. Just look at the 1% growth, JV squad, red line, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lybia, Russia, North Korea, etc, etc, etc. Worst President in modern history. "The 1980s are calling for their foreign policy back" and that was a President in office for four years. That is how clueless he is, he couldn't see what was going to happen 6 months in the future when stupid conservatives and his advisors could. He only read the rosy doctored memos from his sheeple.
The comment on Iran is just BS, and there's not a shred of real evidence to show that the accord will fail, just GOP wishes and propaganda. If you read between the lines in the piece, it will be in our interests to prop up Iran to be a counter-balance to Saudi Arabia. The U.S. will continue to distance itself from them as our reliance on oil decreases. The U.S.-Saudi relationship is going to go south quickly in the coming decades, while the U.S.-Iranian relationship will warm (I know, scary-changey-stuff)
The only valid potential failure you have pointed out is Syria, and Putin may have just nudged the balance in favor of the U.S. It's going to be very interesting to see how this plays out, but as uncomfortable as it might makes old folks still living in the cold war, we probably have a stronger relationship with Russia than most Americans believe.
As for that don't cares you mentioned: Cuba will take care of Cuba. North Korea is a joke and Russia is an impotent nation which the U.S. will always have the upper hand over (Obama knows this).
I was in Seoul working with the military when the little man in North Korea made his statement about having his nuclear weapons ready at a moment's notice and I can assure you that no one over there thinks it is a joke.
International experts are already saying that Iran isn't following their agreements. They've been all kinds of provocative since the pact and now there's even reports of them building a statue of the captured US sailors as a tourist attraction. The Iranians see our weakness as their victory and the mullahs are still rallying behind death to Israel and the US. Please tell me where you see that relationship warming other than on Obama's delusional hope that people will just start loving the US if we give them everything they want. You also have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Saudi Arabia. If our relations with the kingdom go south in the coming decades, it will be because progressive politicians will continue the Obama doctrine of abandoning our allies.
Obama gave up all leverage that we had against Cuba because, legacy, and they haven't done a thing they were supposed to. For years, groups like Human Rights Watch and the media pressure leadership into strong action but somehow now praise Obama in spite of an actual increase in persecutions after the lifting of sanctions. After years of saying America must do something to help struggling Cubans, the leftists are now saying Cuba will take care of Cuba. I guess we can hope that it'll change without a civil war.
Of course, you simply dismiss all of this failure as republican talking points. How convenient it must be for you to ignore reality.
Last edited:
In terms of world influence, North Korea is a joke and completely dependent on their relationship with China. Our influence over them is through our relations with China (relations this bombastic retard that's going to win the Republican nomination wants to set back several years). They're a non-issue.
Iran has been provocative only in the eyes of those that want constant war and believe the only way to exert influence on a world stage is through show of military power. If you didn't see Iran's swift and unconditional release of our sailors (who acknowledged their screwup) and equipment as a sign of this, then I really don't know what to say.
And you're right, it will be progressive leaders that eventually sever our relationship with the Saudis. We're not going to need their oil any more, and we're not going to continue to make their kings and princes obscenely wealthy as they continue to oppress and violate human rights. It always amazes me to see people continue to stick up for our relationship with the Saudis when it was mostly Saudis that planned and executed 9/11. Is the relationship our defense contractors have with the Saudis REALLY that important?
Cuba will be fine.
Another thing to point out about Russia: I think Obama wants them to have their base on the Mediterranean to put pressure on the EU to get some skin in the game militarily. He calls the European nations Free Riders and he's right.
I see Russia's withdraw from Syria working out such that Assad is out of Power (a U.S. interest), Russia gets to keep a military presence on the med (a Russian interest) and Europen nations start to realize they must invest in their own security to check Russian aggression (a U.S. interst) . On the whole, the U.S. wins.
I see Russia's withdraw from Syria working out such that Assad is out of Power (a U.S. interest), Russia gets to keep a military presence on the med (a Russian interest) and Europen nations start to realize they must invest in their own security to check Russian aggression (a U.S. interst) . On the whole, the U.S. wins.
The more I think about it, the Syrian reversal was probably completely a reaction to the E.U. not joining a coalition against Syria. Obama weighed that the E.U.s long term stability requires them to get off the sidelines, and by the U.S. not pushing back on Russia and the Syrian regime it would force the E.U.'s hand. Obama worked with Russia to remove chemical weapons to minimize the horrific costs of Syrian lives this strategy would require. Russia played along because of their interests in establishing a military presence in the region.
Damn that's a tough choice and it takes a lot of balls for a U.S. president to work with the Russians (I take that back actually, i think he played the Russians to subtlety pressure the E.U). The man is a genius that can see the long game. It's hard to imagine having a President Trump (someone who has no capability to play chess on the world stage) following up Obama.
Damn that's a tough choice and it takes a lot of balls for a U.S. president to work with the Russians (I take that back actually, i think he played the Russians to subtlety pressure the E.U). The man is a genius that can see the long game. It's hard to imagine having a President Trump (someone who has no capability to play chess on the world stage) following up Obama.
Last edited:
If y'all weren't so damn boring I wouldnt have to debate myself. I'll eventually state debating honors it will entertain
Hipsters have their new t-shirt #yeswedid
That is an immediate classic. I'm not a hipster or a commie pinko but I'd wear that t-shirt. That might even entice me to hit a Bernie Sanders or Hillary event with it.
Sadly, because president Obama has done such a poor job as president, you won't see another black president for generations! - Donald Trump
smh. it's almost comical seeing conservatives continue to say the same damn things over and over and over and over. just regurgitating the same things they hear other people say, like apes getting all worked up.
the world changes guys. get over it.
the world changes guys. get over it.
doesn't excuse allowing a borderline senile dictator chastising you and the free press in front of the World. He's an amateur when it comes to foreign policy. It's not even a partisan issue, even people that hate Hillary would admit she wouldn't be this bad as Commander In Chief if she was elected instead in 08
Outside of the conservatives media, who really cares about the political theatrics of a senile dictator? What Obama is doing in Cuba isn't about him.
And unless you have specific points to argue on Obama's foreign policy (there's a piece that lays it out it better than any reporting I've seen at the top of the thread, plenty to attack), then I will maintain the "Obama is a foreign policy amateur" is just a regurgitation of conservative yapyap.
umm CBS News's Scott Pelley is not conservative media and he's hammered Obama's foreign policy on and off for the last few years
Yea, he doesn't like how Obama has handled Russia. Obama is pretty clear in his statements that he doesn't see Russia as a 21st century global threat. Back to my point, I see Obama using Russian aggression to pressure Europe to get in the game militarily. The gains that Russia has made have done nothing more than make Putin feel better about himself. He's Obama's pawn.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
You laugh because you've only seen certain folks with an agenda go on and on about Putin out playing Obama. it has never been true
You have no actual idea of what you're talking about to make the assessment of Putin outplaying Obama. You read your liberal sites full of people that have no idea and fall prey to confirmation biases while condemning people who disagree with you. You ignore the opinions of people with actual knowledge of national security matters because it does not agree with your hero worship of the President. I guess maybe you're proving that ignorance truly is bliss.
I read reputable news sites from mid-right to mid-left and rarely interact with people who agree with me to have any type of confirmation bias.
I get there will be huge national security considerations when severing our Saudi relationship (I'm assuming this is what you're referring to since you're intentionally vague and if I recall you work for a defense contactor that has plenty of Saudi programs). But, we'll deal with those national security issues. If the POTUS sees backing away from SA as a viable long term strategy, then the national security issues you're referring to are surmountable.
I have no desire to continue to be involved in the middle east (plenty of people share that sentiment) in a new energy world. I have no desire to see my country continue trade with the Saudis. Prop up another state, let them fight each other to the death and shift our focus to the Pacific - the Obama Doctrine.
This is the beauty of the """"two party"""" the non stop circle system of incompetence circle jerk
You have to believe that EE is just trolling, there is no way he could carry this argument without laughing. Iran broke the agreement by testing ballistic missels a couple weeks ago.
and it's disputed if that missile even had the capabilites to be in violation of the agreement. but the scare party takes it and runs (you only have to look at the argument about swab test that the same people made just after the agreement was signed, which ignored how science actually works, just to push an agenda. it's the same people getting all worked up about the missile test, it's agenda driven not truth driven)
the agreement is to keep Iran from getting a bomb. If the agreement is actually broken and it appears Iran is actively working on a bomb we and our partners will act.
the agreement is to keep Iran from getting a bomb. If the agreement is actually broken and it appears Iran is actively working on a bomb we and our partners will act.
Good lord. What a brainwashed sheep. You're as bad as Dump supporters. No idea what you're talking about just repeat the same HuffPo lines over and over.
The dispute is over rather it was a ballistic missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead which would violate the agreement.
I did not see one news story that questioned the missle. Now you're not even trying to troll.
I can tell you firsthand, that when it comes to CBRN capabilities, the media never has the full story. Even when they question retired military that are experts. There is so much political conditioning before anything gets released that its hard to know what the reality was. Now, there is a lot of investment in the Obama administration in the Iran pact, so even if this was an actual nuclear armed ballistic missile, I wouldn't be surprised to hear rumors that the missile wasn't capable of carrying a nuclear payload.
