tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post446684459366708853..comments2024-03-26T06:17:49.527-07:00Comments on Had Enough Therapy?: What Went Wrong with the Obama Foreign Policy?Stuart Schneidermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12784043736879991769noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-862188754739275322015-10-13T10:13:47.277-07:002015-10-13T10:13:47.277-07:00Sam: the God of war has bad hemhorroids. -$$$Sam: the God of war has bad hemhorroids. -$$$Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-33708085923887051382015-10-12T12:06:10.132-07:002015-10-12T12:06:10.132-07:00I suspect I'm not completely alone, but it see...I suspect I'm not completely alone, but it seems to me that what Obama has done and is doing is coming out exactly as he wishes, or he is delusional.Sam L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00996809377798862214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-2215449088508880402015-10-12T02:22:37.059-07:002015-10-12T02:22:37.059-07:00p.s. I guess this Bloomberg article is what Obama ...p.s. I guess this Bloomberg article is what Obama was talking about in regard to Putin's reckless distraction. We can recall that the first cold war and low oil prices is what helped to sink the USSR in the 1980s, as well as the 1998 bankruptcy was also a period of very low oil prices. <br /><br />It might be that the two worst things in the world are extended periods of expensive oil (which sinks globalism and debt expansion), and extended periods of cheap oil (which sinks producers). It looks like cheap oil is in our indefinite future, and so producers/exports are at greatest risk.<br /><br />Perhaps Obama is doing a favor to "let" Putin do his propagandizing without getting angry about it? Of course a future President Trump's ego would get in the way and would cause great trouble, but Obama's ego seems to allow a difference of opinion to not define his legacy.<br /><br />http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-10-12/it-s-the-economy-putin<br />------------------<br />Russian President Vladimir Putin's renascent cold war with the West is partly meant to obscure his country's economic slump. It's a reckless strategy -- not least because it's making the slump worse. The consequences for Putin and for global security could be dire.<br /><br />Now, the repercussions are becoming apparent. Without the support of high oil prices and hampered by Western sanctions, Russia is headed into a recession deeper than the U.S. experienced in 2009. Though the official unemployment rate remains low, other indicators suggest that hidden joblessness -- including people going to work and not getting paid -- is on the rise. <br /><br />Next year's budget will be a problem. Starved of revenue, the government faces tough choices as it seeks to balance the interests of pensioners, state workers and the military.<br /><br />If the downturn proves temporary, Putin is well-placed to ride it out. His approval rating exceeds 80 percent. Increasingly, though, the evidence suggests that he has done longer-term damage. His grip on the economy may be strangling the dynamism and entrepreneurship that Russia needs to recover.<br />------------------Ares Olympushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09726811306826601686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-67499927916099022992015-10-11T23:15:31.965-07:002015-10-11T23:15:31.965-07:00I saw online Obama spoke on 60-minutes tonight, an...I saw online Obama spoke on 60-minutes tonight, and his standard cool as a cucumber.<br />http://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-obama-60-minutes-syria-isis-2016-presidential-race<br /><br />Steve Kroft did his darnedest to get Obama to feel bad about making American foreign policy an embarressment, but Obama wouldn't follow. Basically he said getting people to fight against ISIL is tough with Assad at their back, and now Russia at their back too.<br /><br />Interestingly Obama considers Russia's actions as more a failure of Russia's leadership than evidence of it. <br />----------<br />Steve Kroft: A year ago when we did this interview, there was some saber-rattling between the United States and Russia on the Ukrainian border. Now it's also going on in Syria. You said a year ago that the United States-- America leads. We're the indispensible nation. Mr. Putin seems to be challenging that leadership.<br /><br />President Barack Obama: In what way?<br /><br />Steve Kroft: Well, he's moved troops into Syria, for one. He's got people on the ground. Two, the Russians are conducting military operations in the Middle East for the first time since World War II--bombing the people-- that we are supporting.<br /><br />President Barack Obama: So that's leading, Steve? Let me ask you this question. When I came into office, Ukraine was governed by a corrupt ruler who was a stooge of Mr. Putin. Syria was Russia's only ally in the region. And today, rather than being able to count on their support and maintain the base they had in Syria, which they've had for a long time, Mr. Putin now is devoting his own troops, his own military, just to barely hold together by a thread his sole ally. And in Ukraine--<br /><br />Steve Kroft: He's challenging your leadership, Mr. President. He's challenging your leadership--<br /><br />President Barack Obama: Well Steve, I got to tell you, if you think that running your economy into the ground and having to send troops in in order to prop up your only ally is leadership, then we've got a different definition of leadership. My definition of leadership would be leading on climate change, an international accord that potentially we'll get in Paris. My definition of leadership is mobilizing the entire world community to make sure that Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon. And with respect to the Middle East, we've got a 60-country coalition that isn't suddenly lining up around Russia's strategy. To the contrary, they are arguing that, in fact, that strategy will not work.<br /><br />Steve Kroft: My point was not that he was leading, my point is that he was challenging your leadership. And he has very much involved himself in the situation. Can you imagine anything happening in Syria of any significance at all without the Russians now being involved in it and having a part of it?<br /><br />President Barack Obama: But that was true before. Keep in mind that for the last five years, the Russians have provided arms, provided financing, as have the Iranians, as has Hezbollah.<br /><br />President Barack Obama: And the fact that they had to do this is not an indication of strength, it's an indication that their strategy did not work.<br /><br />President Barack Obama: You don't think that Mr. Putin would've preferred having Mr. Assad be able to solve this problem without him having to send a bunch of pilots and money that they don't have?<br />------------<br /><br />At any rate, if Obama is embarressed by his failures, he hides it very well. He's ready to step down in 2017 with a job well done, and convinced if he could hold a third term, he'd be reelected. (And given the state of the republicans, it seems a fair assessment.)Ares Olympushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09726811306826601686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-75205341317621259342015-10-11T12:20:29.862-07:002015-10-11T12:20:29.862-07:00Ares, you seem rather agitated and aggravated toda...Ares, you seem rather agitated and aggravated today. Are you having a trying day, or week?<br /><br />As for me, I can see why some say that his foreign policy is pretty much exactly what he wants it to be.Sam L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00996809377798862214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-50411057171217139112015-10-11T07:43:49.471-07:002015-10-11T07:43:49.471-07:00p.s. Cheapskates can read the WSJ article by a goo...p.s. Cheapskates can read the WSJ article by a google search, clicking on first match.<br />https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Real+Obama+Doctrine<br /><br />Niall Ferguson: Some things you can learn on the job, like tending bar or being a community organizer. National-security strategy is different. “High office teaches decision making, not substance,” Mr. Kissinger once wrote. “It consumes intellectual capital; it does not create it.”<br /><br />I'd lean to say that Obama's weak background (i.e. Community Organizer) fail because he's too dependent upon contradictory expert advice while looking for the sensible middle, so he tries to “Don’t do stupid sh--.”, but unfortunately he compromises into mere "less stupid sh--" which is still stupid, i.e. things like failing to prosecute investment bankers on Wallstreet, and thinking Drone strikes could maximize our military reach while minimizing immediate political costs, but leaving future liabilities when his half-measures don't get the job done.<br /><br />It would be simplest to say that NO HUMAN BEING should have the power that the president of the United States has to make problems worse for people we don't much care about.<br /><br />It is interesting to consider the military budget costs us say $1 trillion per year, and one good economic crisis can cost us $20 trillion in asset declines and debt defaults. With near zero interest rates, the federal government has nearly unlimited power to produce new debt, and there is no military budget that is too large to not warrant further increase, even if someday its 100 times larger than all other countries combined.<br /><br />How do we limit this monstrosity after the next boxcutter incident justifies a further expansion of the military and security state? There's no checks-and-balances against the sort of power needed to keep an empire from imploding, and the blank checks have already been printed.<br /><br />So from all that, everyone should be afraid of what we're going to do the next time we need a tail to wag the dog, like to explain why Iran is responsible for our crashing pension plans.<br /><br />But never fear, we're a nation of 300 million guns, and when things go too far, we can just take out the NSA and disarm the U.S. Military with our well regulated state militia to save the day.<br /><br />I have to keep hoping that we'll destroy all our nuclear weapons before the second civil war, but no one talks about such unacceptable ideas, as if the congress could agree on anything sensible anymore. You never know what madman will get access to whichever missile sites. And we definitely don't what to know.<br /><br />At this point I'd almost vote to end the Union, and Obama can be the last president. And if we have 4 presidents in our new disunion (following the leadership of the republicans), perhaps our local balance of power will help keep us out of trouble with the rest of the world.Ares Olympushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09726811306826601686noreply@blogger.com