SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/26/2013 11:58:42 PM
From: i-node1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Brumar89

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576882
 
>> but name a President whose foreign policy record has been better in our lifetimes. Under whose watch was bin Laden killed?

I love it when they resort to bin Laden. It is like all you have is a washed up, dried up, cartoon-watching ex-terrorist who was destroyed by George Bush long before Obama sat shuddering in the other room because he couldn't bear to watch the military take him out.



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 8:42:52 AM
From: steve harris3 Recommendations

Recommended By
longnshort
Taro
TideGlider

  Respond to of 1576882
 
name a President whose foreign policy record has been better in our lifetimes. Under whose watch was bin Laden killed?

Bush destroyed our enemies and chased them to an outhouse. Obama blew up the outhouse and you're impressed. Not impressed, just partisan.

You want an example of Obama's great foreign policy, take a vacation to Libya, Egypt, Iraq, or Syria and send me a postcard.



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 9:50:24 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
simplicity
TideGlider

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576882
 
Queen Bammy fought against the take down of Bin Laden. Leon Panetta eventually had to give the order after battling Ohole for months.



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 9:59:36 AM
From: Bill6 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
longnshort
one_less
simplicity
Tenchusatsu

and 1 more member

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1576882
 
RE: name a President whose foreign policy record has been better in our lifetimes

That's laughable. Name a country we have a better relationship with now than before Obama took over.
He has been a total disaster.



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 10:04:45 AM
From: longnshort5 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bill
Brumar89
FJB
one_less
simplicity

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576882
 
but name a President whose foreign policy record has been better in our lifetimes.

18th Century
1. George Washington 2. John Adams
19th Century
3. Thomas Jefferson 15. James Buchanan
4. James Madison 16. Abraham Lincoln
5. James Monroe 17. Andrew Johnson
6. John Quincy Adams 18. Ulysses S. Grant
7. Andrew Jackson 19. Rutherford B. Hayes
8. Martin Van Buren 20. James Garfield
9. William Henry Harrison 21. Chester A. Arthur
10. John Tyler 22. Grover Cleveland
11. James K. Polk 23. Benjamin Harrison
12. Zachary Taylor 24. Grover Cleveland
13. Millard Fillmore 25. William McKinley
14. Franklin Pierce
20th Century
26. Theodore Roosevelt 35. John F. Kennedy
27. William Howard Taft 36. Lyndon B. Johnson
28. Woodrow Wilson 37. Richard M. Nixon
29. Warren G. Harding 38. Gerald R. Ford
30. Calvin Coolidge 39. James Carter
31. Herbert Hoover 40. Ronald Reagan
32. Franklin D. Roosevelt 41. George H. W. Bush
33. Harry S. Truman 42. William J. Clinton
34. Dwight D. Eisenhower
21st Century
43. George W. Bush



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 10:20:35 AM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
joseffy

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576882
 
Queen Bammy has the whole world hating us. Our allies no longer trust us. Our enemies no longer fear or respect us. Queen Bammy's approval is lower that W's in the Muslim world.

This piece of shit has destroyed America's image in the eyes of the world.



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 12:17:54 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
joseffy
simplicity

  Respond to of 1576882
 
A Small President on the World Stage

At the U.N., leaders hope for a return of American greatness.

By PEGGY NOONANThe world misses the old America, the one before the crash—the crashes—of the past dozen years.

That is the takeaway from conversations the past week in New York, where world leaders gathered for the annual U.N. General Assembly session. Our friends, and we have many, speak almost poignantly of the dynamism, excellence, exuberance and leadership of the nation they had, for so many years, judged themselves against, been inspired by, attempted to emulate, resented. As for those who are not America's friends, some seem still confused, even concussed, by the new power shift. What is their exact place in it? Will it last? Will America come roaring back? Can she? Does she have the political will, the human capital, the old capability?

It is a world in a new kind of flux, one that doesn't know what to make of America anymore. In part because of our president.

"We want American leadership," said a member of a diplomatic delegation of a major U.S. ally. He said it softly, as if confiding he missed an old friend.

"In the past we have seen some America overreach," said the prime minister of a Western democracy, in a conversation. "Now I think we are seeing America underreach." He was referring not only to foreign policy but to economic policies, to the limits America has imposed on itself. He missed its old economic dynamism, its crazy, pioneering spirit toward wealth creation—the old belief that every American could invent something, get it to market, make a bundle, rise. The prime minister spoke of a great anxiety and his particular hope. The anxiety: "The biggest risk is not political but social. Wealthy societies with people who think wealth is a given, a birthright—they do not understand that we are in the fight of our lives with countries and nations set on displacing us. Wealth is earned. It is far from being a given. It cannot be taken for granted. The recession reminded us how quickly circumstances can change." His hope? That the things that made America a giant—"so much entrepreneurialism and vision"—will, in time, fully re-emerge and jolt the country from the doldrums.
<span style="font-size:1.3em">
The second takeaway of the week has to do with a continued decline in admiration for the American president. Barack Obama's reputation among his fellow international players has deflated, his stature almost collapsed. In diplomatic circles, attitudes toward his leadership have been declining for some time, but this week you could hear the disappointment, and something more dangerous: the sense that he is no longer, perhaps, all that relevant. Part of this is due, obviously, to his handling of the Syria crisis. If you draw a line and it is crossed and then you dodge, deflect, disappear and call it diplomacy, the world will notice, and not think better of you. Some of it is connected to the historical moment America is in. </span>


But some of it, surely, is just five years of Mr. Obama. World leaders do not understand what his higher strategic aims are, have doubts about his seriousness and judgment, and read him as unsure and covering up his unsureness with ringing words.

A scorching assessment of the president as foreign-policy actor came from a former senior U.S. diplomat, a low-key and sophisticated man who spent the week at many U.N.-related functions. "World leaders are very negative about Obama," he said. They are "disappointed, feeling he's not really in charge. . . . The Western Europeans don't pay that much attention to him anymore."

The diplomat was one of more than a dozen U.S. foreign-policy hands who met this week with the new president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani. What did he think of the American president? "He didn't mention Obama, not once," said the former envoy, who added: "We have to accept the fact that the president is rather insignificant at the moment, and rely on our diplomats." John Kerry, he said, is doing a good job.

Had he ever seen an American president treated as if he were so insignificant? "I really never have. It's unusual." What does he make of the president's strategy: "He doesn't know what to do so he stays out of it [and] hopes for the best." The diplomat added: "Slim hope."

This reminded me of a talk a few weeks ago, with another veteran diplomat who often confers with leaders with whom Mr. Obama meets. I had asked: When Obama enters a room with other leaders, is there a sense that America has entered the room? I mentioned De Gaulle—when he was there, France was there. When Reagan came into a room, people stood: America just walked in. Does Mr. Obama bring that kind of mystique?

"No," he said. "It's not like that."

When the president spoke to the General Assembly, his speech was dignified and had, at certain points, a certain sternness of tone. But after a while, as he spoke, it took on the flavor of re-enactment. He had impressed these men and women once. In the cutaways on C-Span, some the delegates in attendance seemed distracted, not alert, not sitting as if they were witnessing something important. One delegate seemed to be scrolling down on a BlackBerry, one rifled through notes. Two officials seated behind the president as he spoke seemed engaged in humorous banter. At the end, the applause was polite, appropriate and brief.

The president spoke of Iran and nuclear weapons—"we should be able to achieve a resolution" of the question. "We are encouraged" by signs of a more moderate course. "I am directing John Kerry to pursue this effort."

But his spokesmen had suggested the possibility of a brief meeting or handshake between Messrs. Obama and Rouhani. When that didn't happen there was a sense the American president had been snubbed. For all the world to see.

Which, if you are an American, is embarrassing.

While Mr. Rouhani could not meet with the American president, he did make time for journalists, diplomats and businessmen brought together by the Asia Society and the Council on Foreign Relations. Early Thursday evening in a hotel ballroom, Mr. Rouhani spoke about U.S.-Iranian relations.

He appears to be intelligent, smooth, and he said all the right things—"moderation and wisdom" will guide his government, "global challenges require collective responses." He will likely prove a tough negotiator, perhaps a particularly wily one. He is eloquent when speaking of the "haunted" nature of some of his countrymen's memories when they consider the past 60 years of U.S.-Iranian relations.

Well, we have that in common.

He seemed to use his eloquence to bring a certain freshness, and therefore force, to perceived grievances. That's one negotiating tactic. He added that we must "rise above petty politics," and focus on our nations' common interests and concerns. He called it "counterproductive" to view Iran as a threat; this charge is whipped up by "alarmists." He vowed again that Iran will not develop a nuclear bomb, saying this would be "contrary to Islamic norms."

I wondered, as he spoke, how he sized up our president. In roughly 90 minutes of a speech followed by questions, he didn't say, and nobody thought to ask him.



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 2:01:01 PM
From: Tenchusatsu1 Recommendation

Recommended By
i-node

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576882
 
Z,
name a President whose foreign policy record has been better in our lifetimes
Reagan, Bush Sr., and Clinton. Maybe even Nixon if you stretch a little further beyond "our lifetimes."

Bush Jr. is arguable, but Iraq is free of Saddam Insane and is a lot more stable than before. Same with Afghanistan until Obama.

Obama's only "foreign policy victory" was fulfilling a mission that began under Bush Jr. All he had to do was watch from a conference room.
The Republicans wanted it at least as badly as they wanted Iraq. Don't kid yourself.
We went into Iraq on the heels of 9/11 and Afghanistan. Without that, there would have never been an Iraq war no matter how much you think the Republicans wanted it so bad.

That's why even McCain would have never gone to war with Iran. There would be no pretext, especially with a nation weary of war.

You're just fear-mongering. Straight out of the modern Democrat playbook.

Tenchusatsu



To: SilentZ who wrote (742151)9/27/2013 2:10:05 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576882
 
Lefty retard silentz thinks Obama has a good foreign policy record.