General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRaise your hand if you're glad our foreign policy right now...
...is not in the hands of that gaggle of chickenhawk neocons that had attached themselves to Romney.
.
Baitball Blogger
(46,570 posts)would probably have us attacking Mexico.
Response to JHB (Original post)
bowens43 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Logical
(22,457 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)in your OP. and doesn't belong here IMHO
there is a big difference between President Obama/Biden and the shooter and w
reformist2
(9,841 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)I'll leave it at that. I'd rather not have my reply canned
FreeBC
(403 posts)Are they better than Bush/Cheney? yeah
Would you be defending this marginal improvement so strongly if these were republicans in office and not democrats? I doubt it.
madokie
(51,076 posts)I'm sure the republicons have a lot to do with the drone strikes too. The president is not a dictator as you seem to imply
FreeBC
(403 posts)Think about it: If these were republicans in office with the same exact foreign policies as Obama, you would be incensed. I don't think you are being honest with yourself if you claim differently.
Again, I'm not saying they are worse than Bush/Cheney, but that's an awfully low standard for comparison.
madokie
(51,076 posts)and can't do much considering the congress he has to work with
FreeBC
(403 posts)Maybe technically they should, but effectively Obama is calling all the shots on drone strikes.
Closing Guantanamo could potentially be blocked by congress, but we'll never know because he hasn't really tried to do it and obviously has no intention of doing so.
You really seem to be cheerleading here. Others are discussing this subject rationally and you are playing "our guys good/their guys bad."
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Please get a grip or leave. I have no problem with you stating opinion, but the name calling is just juvenile.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)And we wouldn't be getting out of Afghanistan. And we'd be in Syria and Libya too. We're withdrawing from the War on Terror and now have a "get the perps" policy. Bush/Cheney had the military in hot wars AND drone strikes.
Just remember that it was John McCain in 2008 who said we'd be in Iraq for 100 years. The Republicans have the most vested interest in the military state because that's been the answer for unemployment and economic prosperity since WWII.
And last year Mitt Romney was saber-rattling with the likes of Cheney's lieutenants as advisors.
If you want to equate President Obama with this evil cast of characters, you're in the wrong place.
FreeBC
(403 posts)Not for the right reasons or anything, but drones are cheap and republicans like huge military spending projects that guarantee them lots of kickbacks.
byeya
(2,842 posts)with little regard for human rights.
How many of the 100s of overseas military bases have been closed?
But, if "better than Bush" is the standard, Obama meets that.
madokie
(51,076 posts)you figure it out from there. I've better things to do this morning than to continue this charade of its all obama's fault
FreeBC
(403 posts)and mark the ones we like as "Obama" and the ones we don't like as "those pesky republicans"?
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)classof56
(5,376 posts)Madokie nailed it!
BTW, I was just shuffling through some files and came upon Molly Ivins' obituary, which I had clipped from a newspaper. What a sad day that was, for all of us. Her voice may be silenced but her words live on!
Blessings.
On the other hand, if you don't think relentless attacks by the US in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen as well as other ME policies have anything to do with this, I think you are not thinking it through.
pampango
(24,692 posts)I doubt that "relentless attacks by the US in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen as well as other ME policies" will be what motivated them. Many in these groups think Obama is a secret Muslim who is not doing enough combat 'Islamic terrorism'.
At this point we don't know whether this is a case of domestic or foreign terrorism. If it is the latter, you are probably right.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)to commit bombings inside the US before Obama became president, or before we invaded either Afghanistan or Iraq for that matter.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)increasing antagonism and therefore risk to the security of the US
or it is decreasing it.
If you are arguing that it is unchanged, which is incredibly unlikely, then you are making an argument for it being a poor foreign policy.
So I can only conclude that your position is that the current foreign policy has increased the security of the US --and I suppose you therefore must discount the idea that deaths of innocent people around the world DOES NOT create more enemies of the US.
Seems like a naive if not outright stupid belief system, but you go with it if it makes you feel good, Geek.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)with the rest of the world there would be no risk of terrorist attacks.
By the way, now that you've determined that Obama is at fault for these attacks, you should really get on the horn with the FBI and explain how you know the motives of the bombers.
Certainly drone attacks have proven to be counterproductive, but it's irrational to conclude that drone attacks are the only reason why anyone would want to butcher Americans.
Stop by lower Manhattan and see the memorial there if you need a refresher. Or the sites of the embassy bombings in Africa. Etc etc etc.
Or the victims of Islamist terror attacks in India, etc.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)A) The current foreign policy has resulted in a greater number of enemies of the US hell bent on revenge.
B) The current foreign policy has resulted in fewer numbers of enemies of the US.
C) It has remained the same.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)of the Boston bombing, as you claimed downthread.
No, I don't think relentless attacks by the US in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen had anything to do with the Boston bombing.
How am I not thinking it through?
As an alternative, you can disown that claim.
olegramps
(8,200 posts)Anyone who is not a Islamist extremist is considered to the be the enemy regardless of their nationality or religion. The war between the Sunni and Shia has been ongoing for 1500 years.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Take a bow, sir. We knew we could count on you to point the finger at Obama over this.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Newsflash: Foreign policy involving attacking and killing innocent people results in increased antagonism towards the country that did the killing.
Now EXACTLY rocket science.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)since you are declaring that you know both the identity and the motive for the bombers.
Because, otherwise, you are just hatefully blaming Obama for something that is not his fault.
JHB
(37,128 posts)...we are not further encumbered by a cluster of ideologues with chips on their shoulders to vindicate their discredited (in most quarters) favored courses of action. And their proteges, looking to make their own reputations by continuing that 'fight".
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Obama's foreign policy probably isn't perfect, but it is so much better than the foreign policy of the Republicans.
I think we should close some of our bases overseas, but the military and intelligence are very entrenched in our government. It's probably next to impossible to loosen their grip on their profitable bureaucracy.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Zax2me
(2,515 posts)We were still attacked. With Obama in office and HIS foreign policy.
But - hundreds injured several dead. And you get politics out of this?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)or to start pointing fingers. People should be thinking good thoughts for those who have been injured and for the families of those killed. I'm sure the finger pointing will start soon enough. Give it around a week.
Honestly I have a hunch it isn't foreign, but then again I could be wrong.
JHB
(37,128 posts)...to launch adventures that have nothing to do with what has happened, no matter who turns out to be responsible.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)Our foreign policy is still completely atrocious. Just because things could be worse doesn't mean they're good as-is.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)RyanThomas
(23 posts)Or it would be Iran. Yeah. Iran did it in Romneyland. Time to invade. On the other hand...
We would have cut Big Bird so with the estimated savings of 300 million total from all of PBS we might be able to finance the invasion for a couple minutes. No doubt the noble sacrifice of Big Bird would forever endear him as a glorious martyr for the march on Tehran and the subsequent decade long war against the resistance. All cheer the great leader Romney!
Arcanetrance
(2,670 posts)But bush didn't go to war and pass the Patriot act the very next day either so I will wait and see where the aftermath leads us.
Harry Monroe
(2,935 posts)And not Frat Boy Shrub or his ilk. If it was determined that the Saudis had a hand in this, Rmoney would probably use this as an excuse to invade Iran, because as you know, this ruse worked so well last time.
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)Harry Monroe
(2,935 posts)First and foremost, let them do the detective work and find out who is behind this. We need to be careful and measured in any response withing the government this time, something that was completely lacking after 9/11. Rampant hysteria ruled the day, and the Bushies took full advantage of it to promote their ultimate agenda.
I'd rather them take their time and be right rather than "Rush" to judgement with speculation and hysteria wrapped in the American Flag disguised as "truth" in order to fulfill some other hidden agenda the Administration may have.
So glad adults are in charge for a change. I shudder to think how Rmoney would have responded in the coming weeks or months.
Bradley Manning. Personally I believe Multinational corporations dictate too much of our foreign policy.