The Obama Years- A GOP love story

tshile · 07-17-2014, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

It is dumb to presume any internet user could craft the specific response the US President ought to make. We do not have the access to the intelligence and readiness status of forces in the area. That said, the Russians are not a superpower yet, and if we through back channels used our strengths against their weaker areas(directly or indirectly related to Ukraine) we could create a condition which let the Russian president know that we find their current path unacceptable. Most likely this should have been in the form of deeper sanctions earlier, but forgetting hindsight and rrecognizing that a passenger air liner being shot down should be a game changer where we should call for immediate UN peacekeepers on the ground in eastern Ukraine.

Thank you.

So, basically, you think we should be doing exactly what we're probably doing. If we're not doing it, there's certainly no evidence that we're not and there ideally never would be until well after the issue is over.

CRedskinsRule · 07-18-2014, 01:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tshile

Thank you.

So, basically, you think we should be doing exactly what we're probably doing. If we're not doing it, there's certainly no evidence that we're not and there ideally never would be until well after the issue is over.

No I didn't say that at all. The president was at fund raisers tonight and still hadn't commented on the plane being shot down. We are not advocating UN peacekeepers, which I think should atleast be in the discussion, and we are not putting any (real) pressure on Putin to change his tactics. We also aren't taking a leading role in denouncing the russian occupation of Crimea, nor are we assisting with meaningful defensive assistance a government in Kiev that has staked its future on a strong relationship with us. Because I don't sit in on national intelligence briefs I can't speak with any specificity of how some of these steps would happen, but I can certainly tell you that we are not publicly and repeatedly denouncing the Crimean debacle, that the House has not pushed forward an appropriations bill funding defensive weapons sales to Kiev(nor has the president sought one) and by Putin's actions you can infer that we are not putting pressure on any points that he respects or would cause him to cease and desist with his realpolitik approach to international rules and laws.

Giantone · 07-18-2014, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

No I didn't say that at all. The president was at fund raisers tonight and still hadn't commented on the plane being shot down.

Not true I heard a comment from him about 2:40 pm driving home yesterday (99.1 wnew)

tshile · 07-18-2014, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

No I didn't say that at all. The president was at fund raisers tonight and still hadn't commented on the plane being shot down. We are not advocating UN peacekeepers, which I think should atleast be in the discussion, and we are not putting any (real) pressure on Putin to change his tactics. We also aren't taking a leading role in denouncing the russian occupation of Crimea, nor are we assisting with meaningful defensive assistance a government in Kiev that has staked its future on a strong relationship with us. Because I don't sit in on national intelligence briefs I can't speak with any specificity of how some of these steps would happen, but I can certainly tell you that we are not publicly and repeatedly denouncing the Crimean debacle, that the House has not pushed forward an appropriations bill funding defensive weapons sales to Kiev(nor has the president sought one) and by Putin's actions you can infer that we are not putting pressure on any points that he respects or would cause him to cease and desist with his realpolitik approach to international rules and laws.

Hah, that's what i get for reading to fast. I mixed up names

He has spoken to the issue. The idea that being at a fundraiser is bad suggests there's some other actionable thing he should be doing - what is that?

The UN announced yesterday they're having an emergency meeting today, presumably to discuss many options including putting peace keepers in. So, again, I'm not sure what more it is that should be done at this point.

I'm not sure what it is people want us to do about Ukraine and Russia. People keep saying they want *something* done but they lack specifics.

I get that this administration is borderline worst in history when it comes to foreign policy (at this point at least) and that it's really easy to lump it all together and decry the admin for it. But in this specific case - a commercial airliner is shot down - what is it that should be done? You'd think all the people being so highly critical of the issue would have an answer for that... but they don't.

We don't even have any proof (publicly) of who did it yet...

Chico23231 · 07-18-2014, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tshile

Thank you.

So, basically, you think we should be doing exactly what we're probably doing. If we're not doing it, there's certainly no evidence that we're not and there ideally never would be until well after the issue is over.

Thank you for saying "sit on your hands" the Obama doctrine.

tshile · 07-18-2014, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Thank you for saying "sit on your hands" the Obama doctrine.

i didn't say that.

you still haven't answered the question...

CRedskinsRule · 07-18-2014, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tshile

Hah, that's what i get for reading to fast. I mixed up names

He has spoken to the issue. The idea that being at a fundraiser is bad suggests there's some other actionable thing he should be doing - what is that?

The UN announced yesterday they're having an emergency meeting today, presumably to discuss many options including putting peace keepers in. So, again, I'm not sure what more it is that should be done at this point.

I'm not sure what it is people want us to do about Ukraine and Russia. People keep saying they want *something* done but they lack specifics.

Again, you aren't getting specifics on the internet forums, but you are also quick to dismiss the specifics that I did mention. Being at a fundraiser reflects a lack of concern, could he have resolved the issue by skipping the fundraiser, maybe - maybe not, but he could have demonstrated to the parties involved that it was a serious incident to shoot down a civilian jet. He could have used that time to meet with national security and congressional national security representatives. Perhaps they sit on their thumbs and twiddle their fingers, but Russian and separatists would have to at least believe they were going over possible responses at the US could take, including, coordinating having FAA, Malaysian, and international crews on the ground in Ukraine controlled territory and waiting impatiently for the separatists to allow them onsite. We could have announced that we will seek permission from Kiev to allow AWAC overflight of West Ukraine. Going to a fundraiser, and not speaking publicly (not press releases that G1 referred to), sends a message to world community.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the President could have held a national telecast, instead of a fundraiser, and brought the shooting of a civilian aircraft, operating along a known civilian route, under the shining light of US auspices, or discussed how that act brings a new and dangerous dimension to the fight in Ukraine. He could have highlighted the peaceful election and the high percentage support for the new Kiev government and directly call on the separatists to lay down their arms and meet with Kiev. He could have been working with Merkel, and the other European national leaders, to craft a proposal that would entice the separatists to the table, or crafting a UN resolution to create a UN sponsored peace talks under UN auspices.

All of this is to say that there are specific and substantive acts that a US President can, and should, take when a hostile force attacks a civilian aircraft with reckless abandon, and these acts should be immediate, obvious, and carry the full weight and stature of the office of the President and the power and force of the US world status. Instead, this President chose to release a meaningless release saying we don't even know if any US citizens were on board (so the other 270 or so human beings aren't important?, or the free and safe passage of civilian airlines aren't important), and attend a fundraiser that does nothing to unite the nation, or bring this to the nation as a whole under the seal of the President of the United States of America.

It's easy to do nothing (hell I try and get away with it every day LOL) and it's safer to sit back and offer platitudes to international leaders. It's incumbent on the US President though to be a national LEADER of actions, and not a middle management zombie going through motions of a political hack.

and G1- this is how CBS reported the President's statement:

Quote:

Earlier Thursday, President Obama said that the crash "looks like it may be a terrible tragedy," and offered U.S. assistance in determining what happened.

"Right now we're working to determine whether there were American citizens on board. That is our first priority and I've directed my national security team to stay in close contact with the Ukrainian government," Mr. Obama said during a speech in Wilmington, Del. "The United States will offer any assistance we can to help determine what happened and why and as a country our thoughts and prayers are with all the families of the passengers wherever they call home."

Again, that's a Hallmark condolences card with a statement of American ignorance (why say we don't know if there were US citizens on the aircraft, it's a useless sentence and a silly first priority, whether or not US citizens were killed should be secondary to assuring safe passage of civilian aircraft at heights of 33,000 feet). That's NOT a US President acting as a leader on a world stage. If that and the condolences to Poreshenko and the Malaysian leader is all the US President needs to do, then we should just vote in the owner of Hallmark in the next election.

CRedskinsRule · 07-18-2014, 08:51 AM

going further, and I am not a Putin fan, but here is his statement to his economic advisors and published to the world:

Quote:

ou know that a terrible event occurred today in the sky over Ukraine, an awful tragedy -- a civilian plane was killed, 285 people, according to preliminary information, were killed.

On behalf of the Russian leadership and the Russian government, we express condolences to the bereaved families, the governments of those countries whose nationals were on that plane. I ask you to honor their memory.

(A moment of silence)

In this regard, I want to note that this tragedy would not have happened if there were peace on this land, if the military actions had not been renewed in southeast Ukraine. And, certainly, the state over whose territory this occurred bears responsibility for this awful tragedy.

I have already given instructions to the military departments to provide all necessary assistance in the investigation of this crime. And I also ask the government of the Russian Federation through the available civilian agencies that have the capability to do everything for a thorough investigation of this event. We will do everything -- everything that depends on us, anyway -- in order that the objective picture of what happened is part of the public domain here, in Ukraine and in the rest of the world. This is an absolutely unacceptable thing, and no one has the right to let this pass without the appropriate conclusions and without all of us having objective information about the incident.

Note, he didn't say his first priority was to see if any Russians were on board, instead he offered a line of condolences to everyone, and moved on. He then outlined his country's position(ridiculous as it is) laying the incident on Kiev's feet, then making a national directive to his equivalent of the FAA and other agencies to make their resources available and be ready, and finally stating that the act of shooting a civilian plane is an "absolutely unacceptable thing".

If someone doesn't see the difference the 2 leaders statements and actions present in terms of the gravity of the situation, then I don't know that any internet words ever would.

Chico23231 · 07-18-2014, 08:55 AM

A good start Tshile is single strong statement by the President stating those who shot down the plane will be held accountable period. Align yourself first and collect the facts.

My kneejerk impression is this will be anti aircraft missle fired by separtist either on the border or on the Russian side. Because the missile was supplied by Russia they bare ultimate responsibility. And that would be the next statement by the President and then you take the facts to the EU, Nato, United nations...

tshile · 07-18-2014, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Again, you aren't getting specifics on the internet forums, but you are also quick to dismiss the specifics that I did mention. Being at a fundraiser reflects a lack of concern, could he have resolved the issue by skipping the fundraiser, maybe - maybe not, but he could have demonstrated to the parties involved that it was a serious incident to shoot down a civilian jet. He could have used that time to meet with national security and congressional national security representatives. Perhaps they sit on their thumbs and twiddle their fingers, but Russian and separatists would have to at least believe they were going over possible responses at the US could take, including, coordinating having FAA, Malaysian, and international crews on the ground in Ukraine controlled territory and waiting impatiently for the separatists to allow them onsite. We could have announced that we will seek permission from Kiev to allow AWAC overflight of West Ukraine. Going to a fundraiser, and not speaking publicly (not press releases that G1 referred to), sends a message to world community.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the President could have held a national telecast, instead of a fundraiser, and brought the shooting of a civilian aircraft, operating along a known civilian route, under the shining light of US auspices, or discussed how that act brings a new and dangerous dimension to the fight in Ukraine. He could have highlighted the peaceful election and the high percentage support for the new Kiev government and directly call on the separatists to lay down their arms and meet with Kiev. He could have been working with Merkel, and the other European national leaders, to craft a proposal that would entice the separatists to the table, or crafting a UN resolution to create a UN sponsored peace talks under UN auspices.

All of this is to say that there are specific and substantive acts that a US President can, and should, take when a hostile force attacks a civilian aircraft with reckless abandon, and these acts should be immediate, obvious, and carry the full weight and stature of the office of the President and the power and force of the US world status. Instead, this President chose to release a meaningless release saying we don't even know if any US citizens were on board (so the other 270 or so human beings aren't important?, or the free and safe passage of civilian airlines aren't important), and attend a fundraiser that does nothing to unite the nation, or bring this to the nation as a whole under the seal of the President of the United States of America.

It's easy to do nothing (hell I try and get away with it every day LOL) and it's safer to sit back and offer platitudes to international leaders. It's incumbent on the US President though to be a national LEADER of actions, and not a middle management zombie going through motions of a political hack.

and G1- this is how CBS reported the President's statement:

Again, that's a Hallmark condolences card with a statement of American ignorance (why say we don't know if there were US citizens on the aircraft, it's a useless sentence and a silly first priority, whether or not US citizens were killed should be secondary to assuring safe passage of civilian aircraft at heights of 33,000 feet). That's NOT a US President acting as a leader on a world stage. If that and the condolences to Poreshenko and the Malaysian leader is all the US President needs to do, then we should just vote in the owner of Hallmark in the next election.

That's fair.

It just irks me when you see criticism with no real alternative suggested, especially in a situation like this. You want UN Peace Keepers on the ground? well... they're having a meeting about that today, I honestly don't know what you or anyone else could have done differently in that regard. You want sanctions? We're already doing that...

If the criticism is that he went to a fundraiser, then so be it. We have plenty of examples of other presidents doing similar things. It irked me just as much when people criticized Bush for continuing to read to the children after finding out about 9-11... it seems like shallow criticism from people without a clue as to what is actually going on in totality in that situation. As if the entire arm of military, foreign policy, and intelligence of the United States is temporarily disabled and on standby because the President went to a fundraiser; or chose to continue to read to the children.

If your additional criticism is that he gave a lackluster speech on the issue, or that he missed an important opportunity to be a leader, then I get that. It's ironic... the president that's known for being a great speech maker and not much else, can't seem to make a meaningful speech when it matters

I have no idea what the right response to this situation is... I'd like to see the people responsible put on trial for high crimes and put to death if found guilty, but I don't know how we can do that if Russia decides to protect them (Maybe some of them are in Russia's military/political offices???)

In fact... if the interest is in punishing those responsible (assuming they were terrorists, or someone that made a mistake in the war going on in the area [on either side]) then we need Russia to cooperate and grandstanding and using this as a chance to take shots at them isn't going to help at all...

But it seems like every time something like this happens we hear a lot of crowing from whatever group is opposed to the sitting president when things like this happens, when the truth is majority of the people crowing don't have a clue of what is actually going on, much less what should be going on.

The idea of finding out all the facts before demanding action seems to be a lost virtue these days... it's always hurry up and do something, then criticize whatever that something is.

Chico23231 · 07-18-2014, 09:18 AM

Well the fact is T this may have been avoided if Obama would have lead to begin with. Reactive policy isnt the way to lead, and thats where we are at.

You seen Iraq lately? the country is cut into 3 parts right now.

Obama policy tends to be stand at a dam wall and plug the holes with his fingers as leaks start appearing. You think thats the right way to do things? The administration is seriously lacking a third eye...piss poor is a better discription.

Chico23231 · 07-18-2014, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tshile

That's fair.

It just irks me when you see criticism with no real alternative suggested, especially in a situation like this. You want UN Peace Keepers on the ground? well... they're having a meeting about that today, I honestly don't know what you or anyone else could have done differently in that regard. You want sanctions? We're already doing that...

If the criticism is that he went to a fundraiser, then so be it. We have plenty of examples of other presidents doing similar things. It irked me just as much when people criticized Bush for continuing to read to the children after finding out about 9-11... it seems like shallow criticism from people without a clue as to what is actually going on in totality in that situation. As if the entire arm of military, foreign policy, and intelligence of the United States is temporarily disabled and on standby because the President went to a fundraiser; or chose to continue to read to the children.

If your additional criticism is that he gave a lackluster speech on the issue, or that he missed an important opportunity to be a leader, then I get that. It's ironic... the president that's known for being a great speech maker and not much else, can't seem to make a meaningful speech when it matters

I have no idea what the right response to this situation is... I'd like to see the people responsible put on trial for high crimes and put to death if found guilty, but I don't know how we can do that if Russia decides to protect them (Maybe some of them are in Russia's military/political offices???)

In fact... if the interest is in punishing those responsible (assuming they were terrorists, or someone that made a mistake in the war going on in the area [on either side]) then we need Russia to cooperate and grandstanding and using this as a chance to take shots at them isn't going to help at all...

But it seems like every time something like this happens we hear a lot of crowing from whatever group is opposed to the sitting president when things like this happens, when the truth is majority of the people crowing don't have a clue of what is actually going on, much less what should be going on.

The idea of finding out all the facts before demanding action seems to be a lost virtue these days... it's always hurry up and do something, then criticize whatever that something is.

Again you referencing war...you can be aggressive without firing a shot. How many times I gotta say this? War is reactive thinking, but the fact is you gotta do something...

tshile · 07-18-2014, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Again you referencing war...you can be aggressive without firing a shot. How many times I gotta say this? War is reactive thinking, but the fact is you gotta do something...

No, I'm not referencing war.

I'm pointing out that if it was indeed members of Russian military that did this, then the only way we're ever going to figure out who and why, and attempt to bring anyone to justice, is with the cooperation of Russia.

The rest of the world leaders going on TV and finger shaming Putin isn't going to help in that cause. More sanctions isn't going to help in that cause. Any sign of military aggression (reposition of ships, troops on borders, creating and patrolling no fly zones, etc etc etc) is not going to help.

In fact, I think it's reasonable to assume that those types of things are likely to shut down any real cooperation and communication between Russia and the rest of the world, resulting in not being able to conduct an investigation properly and bring people to trial.

"you gotta do something..."

I keep hearing that everywhere I turn... Here. Radio. TV. I don't hear much else to back it up.

edit: Oh, maybe it was my 'using this to take shots' that confused what I was saying. I mean figuratively, not literally

tshile · 07-18-2014, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Well the fact is T this may have been avoided if Obama would have lead to begin with. Reactive policy isnt the way to lead, and thats where we are at.

You seen Iraq lately? the country is cut into 3 parts right now.

Obama policy tends to be stand at a dam wall and plug the holes with his fingers as leaks start appearing. You think thats the right way to do things? The administration is seriously lacking a third eye...piss poor is a better discription.

You're absolutely right. This issue, as with many other foreign policy issues we're facing right now, can easily be traced back to the last 6 years of bad foreign policy on behalf of the administration.

That's the easy conversation to have. I don't know many people that are informed on the goings-on int he world that think we've done a good job in the last 6 years. Africa is becoming a mess. The middle east is a mess. Eastern europe is a mess. Central America is a mess.

Ironically enough Afghanistan is the only success and as far as I know Bush is the one that deserves credit, not Obama. Everything else is a complete disaster right now.

The harder conversation to have is what do we do *now*.

Chico23231 · 07-18-2014, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tshile

No, I'm not referencing war.

I'm pointing out that if it was indeed members of Russian military that did this, then the only way we're ever going to figure out who and why, and attempt to bring anyone to justice, is with the cooperation of Russia.

The rest of the world leaders going on TV and finger shaming Putin isn't going to help in that cause. More sanctions isn't going to help in that cause. Any sign of military aggression (reposition of ships, troops on borders, creating and patrolling no fly zones, etc etc etc) is not going to help.

In fact, I think it's reasonable to assume that those types of things are likely to shut down any real cooperation and communication between Russia and the rest of the world, resulting in not being able to conduct an investigation properly and bring people to trial.

"you gotta do something..."

I keep hearing that everywhere I turn... Here. Radio. TV. I don't hear much else to back it up.

edit: Oh, maybe it was my 'using this to take shots' that confused what I was saying. I mean figuratively, not literally

Ok, so assuming the facts will find Russia and the separtists downed the plane what you have now is Netherlands as a stakeholder. How did this all begin any ways...right Ukraine moving closer to the EU and then reversing that decision and signing a deal with Russia. You gotta rally around the fact Europe has now been affected by this war with the plane down. Rally the Netherlands and the EU. EU has to demand this war ends. Isolate Russia..work sanctions and threatin embargo. Engage other stakeholders..the other ex Soviet states. Organize them together with the EU. Dont engage Russia in any of this. Then you gotta bring the guilt trip down on the separtist...you caused this, a killing of innocents. At the same time we getting economic aggreements signed with the EU and the ex soviet states. The move really is to isolate Russia and get the EU to buy into the Ukraine (among the other ex soviet states) and the ends is to get the Separtist to the table to talk disarmanent and permanent ceasefire, inclusion within the goverment. After that...Russia is gonna be pissed, then you engage them to not negotiate but to tell them this is how the future of Europe looks.

07-18-2014, 08:55 AM	#174
Chico23231 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 19,815	Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story A good start Tshile is single strong statement by the President stating those who shot down the plane will be held accountable period. Align yourself first and collect the facts. My kneejerk impression is this will be anti aircraft missle fired by separtist either on the border or on the Russian side. Because the missile was supplied by Russia they bare ultimate responsibility. And that would be the next statement by the President and then you take the facts to the EU, Nato, United nations...

07-18-2014, 09:18 AM	#176
Chico23231 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 19,815	Re: The Obama Years- A GOP love story Well the fact is T this may have been avoided if Obama would have lead to begin with. Reactive policy isnt the way to lead, and thats where we are at. You seen Iraq lately? the country is cut into 3 parts right now. Obama policy tends to be stand at a dam wall and plug the holes with his fingers as leaks start appearing. You think thats the right way to do things? The administration is seriously lacking a third eye...piss poor is a better discription.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Obama Years- A GOP love story

Debating with the enemy