The Obama Years- A GOP love story

http://i.imgur.com/F3GmDE1.png

I get a chuckle out of the people for bashing Obama for how's he's handled the plane being shot down. Let's revisit history to back in the Cold War when Russia shot down a Korean plane. How did the glorious Ronald Reagan handle this? I'll let Jon Stewart sum this up.


https://screen.yahoo.com/comedy-central/cover-air-reagan-040000755.html?vp=1

Dianne Feinstein publicly said today that the world would probably very much appreciate an increase in President Obama's attention...

I'm far from an Obama basher... but when your own party leaders are publicly calling you out for not giving two craps about foreign policy issues... after gate's book, and other things that have been leaked to the media...

Pretty bad.

PS - Anyone taking this to mean something about Kerry/Clinton? You want one of them in the oval office after all this?

I get a chuckle out of the people for bashing Obama for how's he's handled the plane being shot down. Let's revisit history to back in the Cold War when Russia shot down a Korean plane. How did the glorious Ronald Reagan handle this? I'll let Jon Stewart sum this up.


https://screen.yahoo.com/comedy-central/cover-air-reagan-040000755.html?vp=1
You and Stewart must have no historical knowledge of Reagan's economic, military and political actions that ultimately destroyed the USSR. Let's also remember the USSR then and now are completely different. Reagan didn't want to launch into a full scale war with the Soviets when he knew the economic pressure, along with the US military build-up and threat of SDI were working to destroy the USSR....without the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American lives that would've been lost in an all-out war with them.

Contrast Reagan's actions prior to KAL 007 with Obama's open-mike statement to having more "flexibility" to work with Putin and the USSR after the 2012 election and you see the result is an aggressive Russia that has no fear whatsoever of a strong US response to their aggressive actions in the region. US weakness only emboldens our enemies and those that want to expand their power through evil and aggression against their neighbors.

You and Stewart must have no historical knowledge of Reagan's economic, military and political actions that ultimately destroyed the USSR. Let's also remember the USSR then and now are completely different. Reagan didn't want to launch into a full scale war with the Soviets when he knew the economic pressure, along with the US military build-up and threat of SDI were working to destroy the USSR....without the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American lives that would've been lost in an all-out war with them.

Contrast Reagan's actions prior to KAL 007 with Obama's open-mike statement to having more "flexibility" to work with Putin and the USSR after the 2012 election and you see the result is an aggressive Russia that has no fear whatsoever of a strong US response to their aggressive actions in the region. US weakness only emboldens our enemies and those that want to expand their power through evil and aggression against their neighbors.


SS33 you sum it up well. Reagan was extremely strong against Russia, I thought everybody knew that...

I think the point was he took 4 days before making a national address and those on the right lambasted obama for not saying anything (some in this thread...) less than 24 hours citing... regan's response as an example of how to handle things.

in his own memoirs he says he was sad to have had to deal wait it - because he was looking forward to the last 3 days of his vacation.

that aside...

iraq warned of isis in august of 2013. in january 2014 isis captured fallujah and Obama responded by clearly not taking it seriously.

this entire administration has continued to drop the ball in foreign policy issues.

Reagan's era dealt with wired phones, newspapers, and commodore 64s(well maybe IBM mainframes) not high speed video feeds, instantaneous news feeds from multiple sources, and Intel computers dealing with terabytes of data.

You and Stewart must have no historical knowledge of Reagan's economic, military and political actions that ultimately destroyed the USSR. Let's also remember the USSR then and now are completely different. Reagan didn't want to launch into a full scale war with the Soviets when he knew the economic pressure, along with the US military build-up and threat of SDI were working to destroy the USSR....without the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American lives that would've been lost in an all-out war with them.

Contrast Reagan's actions prior to KAL 007 with Obama's open-mike statement to having more "flexibility" to work with Putin and the USSR after the 2012 election and you see the result is an aggressive Russia that has no fear whatsoever of a strong US response to their aggressive actions in the region. US weakness only emboldens our enemies and those that want to expand their power through evil and aggression against their neighbors.


First off, I'm merely commenting about Reagan's/Obama's response to a plane shot down. I don't recall formulating a stance that Reagan was weak with Russia, but I can guarantee you that he would not have done ANYTHING about the invasion of Ukraine. Did they do anything with Afghanistan? Nope. Well, they did train and fund Mujahideen fighters, which end up turning around and being some of the same guys that caused 9/11, but that's another story.

Nobody, and I mean NOBODY (Reagan/Romney/Bush/etc) would be sending troops to Ukraine to fight off an invading Russian army. First off, we can't afford it. We are to our eyeballs in debt, and simply cannot afford another war anytime soon. Secondly, Russia still has nukes, and no matter how bad we could wipe the floor with Russia, at the end, would you trust a lunatic like Putin with his finger on a nuke? Nope.

Also, I'd say the USSR had more to do with their collapse than Reagan or the US. The USSR invested all their money into military instead of opening up the economy and letting it flourish. (which is what we did) Hey, it's kind of the route we are heading down now.

Putin has brought some prosperity back to Russia, but he's still a old KGB man with dreams of a unified USSR. The bad news for him is even if he did get back the USSR, it will NEVER EVER reach the might they once had. All Putin is doing now is cutting economic strings to his country and eventually the oligarchs in Russia will turn on him.

I'm no Obama supporter, but I'm not sure what you all expect Obama to do? At the end of the day, Ukraine isn't a valued resource for us so the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

Reagan's era dealt with wired phones, newspapers, and commodore 64s(well maybe IBM mainframes) not high speed video feeds, instantaneous news feeds from multiple sources, and Intel computers dealing with terabytes of data.

Yet he still had the information immediately and it still took 4 days. And he still made that comment in his book.

Yet he's the only used to criticize the current reaction.

I get that the current Administration sucks at foreign policy. What's funny/sad/amusing is the lengths some people go to find criticism.

They could have at least looked into how long it took Regan to respond before chastising Obama, since they clearly couldn't remember themselves.

I'm no Obama supporter, but I'm not sure what you all expect Obama to do? At the end of the day, Ukraine isn't a valued resource for us so the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

This has been my question from the start.

When you finally get people to stop speaking in grand and ambiguous terms you find out not very many people have any actionable ideas that's are all that different than what is currently going on.

It's growing tiring watching how people react to this stuff in the media (politicians and talking heads) and how so many people latch onto it and join in...