DC Tom Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 A on foreign policy? Really? I won't rake the guy over the coals for Lybia, Iraq, or even Afghanistan, but you think trapsing around the world bowing down to foreign leaders, kissing ass, apologizing for America, and generally coming off as a naive dupe earns him an A? I will for Libya. Obama's got a pretty pedestrian foreign policy. It's notable that his worst foreign policy exercises (e.g. Libya. Or the increasingly buggered Eastern European missile defense issue.) have been when he deviated significantly from the policies of Bush's second term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 A on foreign policy? Really? I won't rake the guy over the coals for Lybia, Iraq, or even Afghanistan, but you think trapsing around the world bowing down to foreign leaders, kissing ass, apologizing for America, and generally coming off as a naive dupe earns him an A? Yep, All in all I give him an A. Taking out Bin Laden was great for the country and gave us some much needed payback. The Apologizing for America I'll give him a pass on, considering the success we had with OBL and Libya. I actually am 100 % supportive of the lead from behind strategy, and from my perspective it worked phenomenally well. It's about time we encouraged our European "partners" to pony up and do more. I had this sort of discussion with someone else on FB the other day, I unlike many other people am not ideologically driven, these conservative litmus tests are for the idealogues and sheeples and I don't give two ***** about typical right or left wing rhetoric, so this bowing down to other foreign leaders has virtually very very very very little to do with my overall calculation in determining who is and is'nt a good president. I care about results, and in regards to foreign policy, he's delivered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I care about results, and in regards to foreign policy, he's delivered. The problem with judging foreign policy in the present is that you don't have the benefit of looking at it through a 20-year hindsight prism. Successful foreign policy is not only about getting Europeans to pony up for the costs. It's also ensuring that foreign policy abets the country's economic standing, markets remain open, trade barriers come down, our rivals don't increase their sphere of influence and potential threats are kept at bay. If I were to score him on the above, he gets a C-/D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Yep, All in all I give him an A. Taking out Bin Laden was great for the country and gave us some much needed payback. I don't know that "killing Bin Laden" makes for much of a foreign policy, and if it does, I suspect it's up there with the "I support our troops" policy or "Children are the future" policy or "Water is wet" policy. Yeah, okay, he gave an order, but that was a decision, not a policy. And like Iraq and Bush, I think it's probably a little premature to suggest Libya was handled properly. I appreciate no boots on the ground, etc., but real leaders don't ever, ever, ever lead from behind. That's not a conservatively driven litmus-test thing. It's just a reality. I don't care what party you're from; there is no leading in "leading from behind." Whenever I hear the phrase "leading from behind" I think of "jumbo shrimp." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 The problem with judging foreign policy in the present is that you don't have the benefit of looking at it through a 20-year hindsight prism. I do agree with you, but OBL is dead and most likely he won't be coming back, so the advantage of hindsight most likely won't change 20 years from now, and in regards to Libya, only unless you were Ron Paul, Khadafy (sp)? would of been taken out, so it just would of been a matter of how and considering that we didn't lose hardly any if any lives and didn't spend much time consumed over there and didn't incur hardly any costs,I would have to rate that (up to now)from my perspective a complete victory. I don't believe anyone should underscore the significance of taking out OBL, that was huge, on so many levels. There is plenty to criticize the man for, but in all honesty, foreign policy has been an area where he has outperformed relative to expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 but real leaders don't ever, ever, ever lead from behind. That's not a conservatively driven litmus-test thing. It's just a reality. I don't care what party you're from; there is no leading in "leading from behind." Whenever I hear the phrase "leading from behind" I think of "jumbo shrimp." Not entirely true. There are a few instances I can think of in politics of a leader leading an effort, but not "leading" in the sense that they're up-front with any sort of high visibility. The bigger problem with Obama is that, either way, he isn't exercising leadership. Making pretty pretty speeches about how we're not taking sides in Libya (even though we are, except we're not, but Qadaffi's lost the right to rule, but we're not trying to oust him) while "NATO" actively supports the rebels is not leadership. Not very sound foreign policy, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Yep, All in all I give him an A. Taking out Bin Laden was great for the country and gave us some much needed payback. The Apologizing for America I'll give him a pass on, considering the success we had with OBL and Libya. I actually am 100 % supportive of the lead from behind strategy, and from my perspective it worked phenomenally well. It's about time we encouraged our European "partners" to pony up and do more. I had this sort of discussion with someone else on FB the other day, I unlike many other people am not ideologically driven, these conservative litmus tests are for the idealogues and sheeples and I don't give two ***** about typical right or left wing rhetoric, so this bowing down to other foreign leaders has virtually very very very very little to do with my overall calculation in determining who is and is'nt a good president. I care about results, and in regards to foreign policy, he's delivered. Do you really belive OBL would be alive today if someone besides Obama was the president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Not entirely true. There are a few instances I can think of in politics of a leader leading an effort, but not "leading" in the sense that they're up-front with any sort of high visibility. I understand what you're saying, but I don't consider what you're referring to as "leading from behind" because what you're describing is a form of leadership. To me, "leading from behind " simply means you're letting someone else lead for the sake of not looking like a pig. I get what Obama is trying to do with his whole Sally Fields Foreign Policy Plan. If we're not perceived as oil-robbing nation-building brutes who napalm children, then maybe the evil people will like us. They'll really like us. All I'm saying is that it may be a lot of things, but "leading" isn't one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Do you really belive OBL would be alive today if someone besides Obama was the president? I don't know, most likely the trigger would of been pushed, but end result, he did and he died and I don't know about you but for my mother, brother, father and I, we celebrated and it happened during his watch. In regards to leading from behind, end result, he was taken out, we didn't lose lives and we spent hardly any money. WTF is wrong with that????????? Who cares what you or I think consists of "leadership" in the real world, whether its business or in our personal lives, what matters are results, so while many of you wanna argue that he didn't show leadership, who the !@#$ cares? The job was completed, in the most proficient of manners, without loss of life and tremendous cost to our nation, and anyone who can't recognize that fact has got too much partisan **** in their eyes and needs to take a step back and recognize. Now if you want to talk about the economy, the debt and our entitlement problems, then all one has to do is look at the product and see that he has failed miserably, but the end product from where we can judge now regarding foreign policy has been a sucess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Who cares what you or I think consists of "leadership" in the real world, whether its business or in our personal lives, what matters are results, so while many of you wanna argue that he didn't show leadership, who the !@#$ cares? The job was completed, in the most proficient of manners, without loss of life and tremendous cost to our nation, and anyone who can't recognize that fact has got too much partisan **** in their eyes and needs to take a step back and recognize. This is like saying that because the healthcare law got passed, there is nothing to worry about healthcare in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Call me a cynical !@#$ I just don't believe any of this is done out of altruism. It is simply pimping out the first lady for political gain, so all us dumb asses can say "oh look how wonderful, wholesome and caring she is, I think I'll vote for her husband". Yeah sure, past presidents have pimped out their wives but with the Obama's the media actually want us to believe its more than just pimping for votes! Edited February 1, 2012 by whateverdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 This is like saying that because the healthcare law got passed, there is nothing to worry about healthcare in the future. Yeah, same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I don't know, most likely the trigger would of been pushed, but end result, he did and he died and I don't know about you but for my mother, brother, father and I, we celebrated and it happened during his watch. In regards to leading from behind, end result, he was taken out, we didn't lose lives and we spent hardly any money. WTF is wrong with that????????? Who cares what you or I think consists of "leadership" in the real world, whether its business or in our personal lives, what matters are results, so while many of you wanna argue that he didn't show leadership, who the !@#$ cares? The job was completed, in the most proficient of manners, without loss of life and tremendous cost to our nation, and anyone who can't recognize that fact has got too much partisan **** in their eyes and needs to take a step back and recognize. Now if you want to talk about the economy, the debt and our entitlement problems, then all one has to do is look at the product and see that he has failed miserably, but the end product from where we can judge now regarding foreign policy has been a sucess. So was Bush a great president because Khalid Sheikh Mohammed sits in Gitmo? Lets not play the name game here. Was OBL The first time a American president acted against a foreign threat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 nd anyone who can't recognize that fact has got too much partisan **** in their eyes and needs to take a step back and recognize. No one is arguing whether giving the order to kill Bin Laden was a great thing. Of course it was. But it's a massive leap of faith to suggest it was any kind of foreign policy coup simply because the chance to kill Bin Laden happened "on his watch." We get it. Obama deserves some credit for things. Killing Bin Laden may even be one of them. But it wasn't leadership and it sure the hell wasn't a result of some special Obama Foreign Policy. I understand it's important to not see things through overly partisan eyes, but it's also important not to hurt yourself trying to prove you don't see things through overly partisan eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I do agree with you, but OBL is dead and most likely he won't be coming back, so the advantage of hindsight most likely won't change 20 years from now, and in regards to Libya, only unless you were Ron Paul, Khadafy (sp)? would of been taken out, so it just would of been a matter of how and considering that we didn't lose hardly any if any lives and didn't spend much time consumed over there and didn't incur hardly any costs,I would have to rate that (up to now)from my perspective a complete victory. I don't believe anyone should underscore the significance of taking out OBL, that was huge, on so many levels. There is plenty to criticize the man for, but in all honesty, foreign policy has been an area where he has outperformed relative to expectations. I agree that he's outperformed my expectations in this regard, but that's not saying a whole lot. Where the negative consequences of bowing down to foreign leaders and pulling up your skirt to show them you have no balls may not be immediate there are long term concerns. You need to find a happy medium between being an overly aggressive bully and being a big kitty. Where I may take issue with TR on many issues, he had it right when he said speak softly and carry a big stick. Obama wants to give them the stick and bend over. When the rest of the world sees us as a tiger with no teeth we're in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Obama wants to give them the stick and bend over. When the rest of the world sees us as a tiger with no teeth we're in trouble. Maybe, but you're talking hypotheticals, I'm strictly expressing my judgement based on current TANGIBLE results. In regards to his perceived weakness, I honestly believe that is overblown, sure I'd rather have a president that APPEARS to be a little tougher and less apologetic but once again, I care about results, thats the way I was raised, its logical and everything else in between from my perspective is a bunch of noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Maybe, but you're talking hypotheticals, I'm strictly expressing my judgement based on current TANGIBLE results. In regards to his perceived weakness, I honestly believe that is overblown, sure I'd rather have a president that APPEARS to be a little tougher and less apologetic but once again, I care about results, thats the way I was raised, its logical and everything else in between from my perspective is a bunch of noise. I think that applies to everything that's inconsistent with your preconceptions. No offense, but this is a pattern with you. We're not talking about the difference between results and hypotheticals. We're talking about short term and long term results. Give everyone in the U.S. a $5k check and you will see results. In the short term you will see an economic bump. In the long term you will see an entirely different, but just as tangible, result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) I think that applies to everything that's inconsistent with your preconceptions. No offense, but this is a pattern with you. We're not talking about the difference between results and hypotheticals. We're talking about short term and long term results. Give everyone in the U.S. a $5k check and you will see results. In the short term you will see an economic bump. In the long term you will see an entirely different, but just as tangible, result. I care about results, everything else plays second fiddle. Edited February 1, 2012 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I care about results, everything else plays second fiddle. I care about results to but I also pay attention who takes credit for those results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 anyone who can't recognize that fact has got too much partisan **** in their eyes, and needs to take a step back and recognize. Your cadence needs a little work, but I think you have a future in political rapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts