The Obama Years- A GOP love story

[tshile]

So you want a strongly worded public address?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by tshile

So you want a strongly worded public address?

Lol yeah. That's exactly how Reagan handled the Russians.

[tshile]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Lol yeah. That's exactly how Reagan handled the Russians.

So you think the appropriate response would be to join/create/participate in another cold war?

You've yet to answer the question. Give me something actionable as a response to this. If you were president, what would you do?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by tshile

So you think the appropriate response would be to join/create/participate in another cold war?

You've yet to answer the question. Give me something actionable as a response to this. If you were president, what would you do?

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.

[tshile]

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.

[Dirtbag59]

Soviet Russia was already on the brink by the time Regan got into office. The best you could attribute to Regan was he may have sped up the collapse by a couple of years and even that seems generous.

I'd argue that the Chernobyl incident with it's tremendous cost and the animosity created by the subsequent cover up did more damage to Soviet Russia then Reagan could have ever hoped to take credit for. And even then with a $15 billion direct loss it was a small part of the eventual collapse.

The Soviets dedication to communism, as least in principle, is what did them in. I remember seeing documentaries about East Germany where a child recalled asking his teacher when the world would be rid of currency and the teacher something akin to likely by the turn of the century. Such was the mindset of the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact countries though it was no secret that the party members were living well.

Had they embraced the hybrid system that China did post-Mao they likely would still be a major world power.

Personally in regards to Russia I would prefer to stick with the international community and let Russia make a fool of itself. The end result of Russia messing up is likely to happen regardless. Military action at this point will likely only cost American lives and if anything serve as propaganda fodder for the Ultra Nationalist in Russia which could possibly lead to a more dangerous conflict. Plus keep in mind the Ukraine crisis is currently costing Russia a lot of money in direct cost (ie not including possible embargos and sanctions). This latest incident is going to make the situation worse for Russia across the board.

After all it doesn't matter what your intent is. When a child sees an American solider in his back yard it doesn't take much for an adult to convince them that they're evil imperialist hell bent on taking over the world. Also another thing to keep in mind is that many Putin supporters are ultra nationalist hoping for a chance to cry victim should America exceed its reach. Part of the reason Putin has been able to keep power up to this point is that he's convinced the Russian people that everyones out to get them, particularly the US, and only a "strong" leader such as himself can protect the people. You know someone like.....

For the lulz. By the way this wasn't a parody, it was a random song praising Putin that was embraced by Putin and his camp following the songs popularity in 2002.

In other words to give Regan credit for taking down the Soviet Union by employing a 'tough foreign policy' is akin to giving Clinton full credit for the tech boom in the mid to late 90's. The point being Presidents get way to much credit and blame for virtually everything that takes place when they're in office. Especially when there are billions of other factors in play for any given situation.

[CRedskinsRule]

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

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]

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...

[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.

[tshile]

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*.

[CRedskinsRule]

I will let it go after one last statement, because it seems like you don't really want to believe there are other ways to handle this.

my last statement:
The US President has a bully pulpit like no other in the world, and the assets to assess rapidly occurring events with amazing efficiency. In THIS case, an unarmed, civilian, aircraft flying along a well known flight path, shot down with anti aircraft missiles, that bully pulpit should have been used to initiate specific responses - several of which I outlined. I don't care if it's a republican president, a democratic president, or a libertarian president. Our position in the world and the office of the Presidency demands that we have more than a Hallmark card response. We didn't see that in THIS case, which happens to be under President Obama's watch.

my last "specific responses":
-- Emergency meeting with National Security Advisors and top congressional members from both parties
-- Televised national unity speech that outlines concerns for air traffic safety, and use of anti-aircraft rockets against civilian flights
-- Send FAA advisors to Ukraine today and make a public show that they either are being allowed on site immediately or question why not.
-- (privately yesterday, and assuming the yes answer announce first thing this morning) offer US AWAC monitoring over Ukranian Air Space. It does put us at a small risk, that someone might shoot an AWAC down, but it sends a HUGE message that commercial airspace is important to the US. Even Offer joint missions with Russia if the President decides to do that, I remember when Reagan offered to share SDI with Russia, sure it's not likely they will accept the offer, but you are leading not reacting.
-- Call for the UN to authorize IMMEDIATE peacekeeping troops
-- Reiterate that Crimea is part of Ukraine sovereign territory.

The US could have done any or all of these things without any risk (except the AWACs) of a shooting war between Russia and the US, and it would have presented a far different path then one where your adversary sees you attending a partisan event, with no notable response to such an egregious act.

[tshile]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I will let it go after one last statement, because it seems like you don't really want to believe there are other ways to handle this.

Ok.

I'm not sure why you think that way, I was trying to be very open and genuine in asking what should be done and I thought I responded thoughtfully to your last post. Oh well.

By the way - You have no way of knowing that many of your suggested actions have not been, or not currently in the process of being, done. Just sayin'.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by tshile

Ok.

I'm not sure why you think that way, I was trying to be very open and genuine in asking what should be done and I thought I responded thoughtfully to your last post. Oh well.

By the way - You have no way of knowing that many of your suggested actions have not been, or not currently in the process of being, done. Just sayin'.

I think that you have summarily dismissed every suggestion with your last line "have not been or not currently in the process of being done" but that's simply wrong.

I know the following:
The President did NOT have a televised address to the country.
The President did NOT have FAA technicians on the ground in the Ukraine this morning, waiting to gain entry to the crash site.
The President did NOT meet with bipartisan members of congress while at the fund raiser.
The President did NOT in his initial public statement (or subsequent ones that I am aware of) condemn military force against commercial airlines and call publicly for all sides to acknowledge that safe passage of civilian airlines is an unmoveable fact.

Yes some things happen in the backdrop, but THIS incident should have been, imo, handle openly and forcefully within moments of assessing that it was a military rocket hitting a civilian airline, and the world knows it was not.

[tshile]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

The President did NOT have a televised address to the country.

Which I already agreed with you on...

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

The President did NOT have FAA technicians on the ground in the Ukraine this morning, waiting to gain entry to the crash site.

Fox News is reporting that there are investigators that will be deployed. How many, from which agencies, and when they'll be at the crash site is not public information, but we are sending people....

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

The President did NOT meet with bipartisan members of congress while at the fund raiser.

Right... the fund raiser again... but you have no idea if he did or didn't before or after the fund raiser.... That's my point... you're using the fund raiser to take jabs and insinuate something you, I, and everyone else has zero clue about.

I wouldn't put it past this president to shirk off his responsibilities in this situation, don't get me wrong. I've yet to see this president display anything close to traits of strong leadership.

I just can't help but chuckle at how this stuff goes every time there is an issue... it doesn't seem to matter who the president is, everyone's aware of everything going on behind the scenes and becomes a critic all the sudden...

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

The President did NOT in his initial public statement (or subsequent ones that I am aware of) condemn military force against commercial airlines and call publicly for all sides to acknowledge that safe passage of civilian airlines is an unmoveable fact.

Yes some things happen in the backdrop, but THIS incident should have been, imo, handle openly and forcefully within moments of assessing that it was a military rocket hitting a civilian airline, and the world knows it was not.

The President's public statement was yesterday somewhere around 1 or 2 PM. I do not recall there being significant evidence (publicly) available at the time that said it was indeed a missile, but maybe I wasn't paying enough attention.

As we speak the White House has announced that the President is preparing to address the nation...

It seems like on some of these points you're being critical just for the sake of being critical. Like I said... for many of the things you suggest as 'better' ways of dealing with this, you have no way of knowing it's not already being done. For others... you haven't allowed very much time, or for very much fact searching, to write off those actions as not being taken yet.

[tshile]

Fair enough

I agree whole heatedly with your post 197.

But as I said, I take some issues with your other post. Which is not at all intended to suggest that's a bad way to handle it, or the wrong way. Just that I see how it's not a 100% good way of doing it, and wonder whether there is a better way.

Off the top of my head - maybe consider that the downing of this airliner was an accident and that there would be some good to be done by approaching Russia sincerely. The good being done would be cooperation on all sides to investigate and bring people accountable. Maybe that would open the door to a resolution of the entire Ukraine/Russia issue? Probably not, but possibly?

That may be entirely naive, and I recognize that. I just can't help but wonder