United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Here’s a BIG Difference Between Bush and Obama Policy
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/03 ... between-bush-and-obama-policy/
Published: Mar 3, 2010
Author: David Forsmark
Post Date: 2010-03-03 10:10:53 by dont eat that
Keywords: None
Views: 12565
Comments: 86
Under Obama foreign policy, this guy would be still doing this to other people. Here’s a BIG Difference Between Bush and Obama Policy 2010 March 3 by David Forsmark Under Obama foreign policy, this guy would be still doing this to other people. Ryan Mauro replied to my post that it does matter whether Republicans and Democrats are in charge of foreign policy with this fair point: David Forsmark replied to my post about the George W. Obama Administration here, titled “Yes, Ryan, There IS a Difference Between the 2 Parties on National Security.” Just a little clarification: I was comparing the Obama and Bush Administrations, not necessarily both parties, and I didn’t say there was no difference at all, just nothing really decisive in my opinion. Well, I’d say Saddam could point out one decisive difference for you, Ryan. And, as you yourself point out, the “surge” would not have happened under Obama and Iraq would be well on its way to slipping back into tyranny. Moreover, giving Obama credit that CIA interrogators are not being prosecuted, that KSM is not being tried in New York, or that the Patriot Act was renewed thanks to public pressure (and great work by Congressmen Pete Hoekstra and Peter King holding their feet to the public fire) is like giving the Clintons credit that Hillarycare did not become reality. Yes, Obama has sometimes bowed to reality, particularly in foreign policy. But every instinct of this Administration has initially taken it in the opposite direction until it had to be dragged kicking and screaming to a politically defensible position. The fact that this has not led to a major disaster yet, is just good fortune. I would rather not have to bet on it continuing.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 45.
#1. To: dont eat that (#0)
Saddam was tried and executed under existing Iraqi law...or so we were told... Is that no longer the case?
As if that would ever have happened if Mandingo had been President.
Are you going to answer the question? And most everyone in the region agrees invading Iraq was a mistake. It has next to no popular support...barely does in the US...it was the worst foreign policy blunder ever made by a POTUS.
Bush gave them the opportunity to try Saddam. That never would have happened under Mr. "57 States." And most everyone in the region agrees invading Iraq was a mistake. It has next to no popular support...barely does in the US...it was the worst foreign policy blunder ever made by a POTUS. Bullshit anti-war rhetoric. The success in Iraq will reshape the region. Even Mandingo and Gaffe Biden can't resist jumping on the bandwagon.
Since history shows that world empires always live happily ever after, which country do you propose invading next?
A false assumption about intentions in Iraq.
We've buit permanent structures there to house US troops perpetually. We also hold their hands and tell them "There there..screw the elections...we'll make sure everything stays okay..." everytime they are supposed to have one... IF killing Saddam was the goal as well as transferring US tax dollars to various Boy Blunder/Big Dick's cronies then the invasion was a success. By any real measure of success it's an abject failure...
Just as we've done in Germany, Japan, Korea, Phillipines, Central America, etc. And we haven't established empires.
Declared wars and had there been no Cold War hysteria we'd have been out of there when Stevenson was POTUS.
Another dumbass. No wonder you admire him.
I've made no statement about Stevenson but if we don't engage in the irrational fear of the USSR there is no need to elect a general. Dosns't matter tho...Ike totally turned on the people who elected him and gave us Earl Warren which, given that the nation was a step away from fascism, was a good thing...
what a ridiculous comment
#50. To: dont eat that (#45)
Being a liberal means you pretend the Soviet Union didn't attack every single nation that had a common border with them post WWII. Irrational fear? God, what a dunce. Then again, being a Democrat means you ignore reality. And history apparently.
Yea...the reaction while Sputnik flew over head was very rational... Ferrering out Hollywood screen wrters was another...
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: war (#1)
#5. To: dont eat that (#2)
(Edited)
#13. To: war (#5)
It was answered.
#18. To: dont eat that (#13)
The success in Iraq will reshape the region.
#19. To: Get Outta Dodge! (#18)
Since history shows that world empires always live happily ever after,
#21. To: dont eat that (#19)
(Edited)
A false assumption about intentions in Iraq.
#25. To: war (#21)
#33. To: dont eat that (#25)
Just as we've done in Germany, Japan
#35. To: war (#33)
Stevenson
#41. To: dont eat that (#35)
#45. To: war (#41)
irrational fear of the USSR
Replies to Comment # 45.
#62. To: dont eat that (#45)
(Edited)
what a ridiculous comment
End Trace Mode for Comment # 45.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]