Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gary105 who wrote (138900)	10/15/2013 7:31:28 AM
From: Robohogs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Why I bought several million nominal value of puts just in case. Novembers so time to get there. I agree on human relations comment, no matter what one thinks of them. If involved in multiple negotiations, gotta be careful.

To: Gary105 who wrote (138900)	10/15/2013 8:57:10 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 149317

Obama’s credibility — and that of his critics by Serge Halimi Less than six months ago, the US was described as a phoenix risen from the ashes, with an economic recovery, independent energy resources, dominant IT multinationals and a renascent car industry. Now it is an empire in decline, brought down by the indecisive conduct of President Barack Obama ( 1). That’s according to the chattering classes. They have made talking about “the strange weakness of America” ( 2) a minor industry. They claim Obama damaged US credibility over Syria by not launching yet another operation against an Arab state ( 3), as Paris and a few brilliant strategists hoped he would (see Olivier Zajec, France’s resounding defeat). Credibility is their key word. Let’s consider credibility. The Vietnam war resulted from a decision taken by John F Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, on the pretext of preventing another domino falling to the Soviet or Chinese Communists. For the US, it was a question of credibility. Three million Indochinese perished. In 1979, four years after the US defeat, China and Vietnam were at war… The Iraq war was devised by George W Bush to punish a regime supposed to be part of an “axis of evil”, with Iran and North Korea. For the US, it was a question of credibility. Today, Iraq is in ruins and the Baghdad government established by US soldiers is closer than ever to Iran. In October 2002 Obama, then a young senator who was against the US venture in Iraq, said: “I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.” After he was elected president, he stepped up the dumb war in Afghanistan until he was forced to retreat. The warmongers urged him to take a strong line in Syria: to violate international law by resorting to force without Security Council authorisation; to take no notice of anything Congress had to say; to disregard what it did say if that contradicted his expressed wishes; and to launch a military operation with far fewer allies than Bush’s “coalition of the willing” in 2003. The US president was called upon to do all this against the wishes of a majority of his fellow citizens, some of whom fear that the US army will become “Al-Qaida’s air force” in Syria ( 4). He hesitated, and seems to have concluded that his credibility would easily survive a refusal to enter another dumb war in the Middle East. mondediplo.com