What has been Obama’s biggest mistake in the Mideast?

Sal wrote:

gatorfan wrote:He thought he had the answers then but we now know he wasn't up to the task.

There are no correct answers.

There are no good options.

There were, but as you know our semi-retired president ignored all advice and went out to campaign and fund raise rather than even make an attempt to learn his trade.

Mr. Markle,

Let us discuss two Middle East models. I assume by your posts that you are a supporter of Israel. I assume that a safe Israel seems like good American Foreign Policy.

So one model has a strong Mr. K in Libya sponsoring terrorism and attacks on America and Israel. It also would have a strong Syria with an air force and ground troops which could move against Israel as they did in 68 and 73. The other would be Iraq where Israel had to attack to take out their nuclear power plants for fear of development of weapons of mass destruction, and of course the source of SCUD missile attacks.

The second model has Libya in chaos, Syria in chaos, and Iraq in chaos......no nation state capable of doing squat against Israel, and destined to use all their economic power dealing with their internal chaos.

Do you really think any of this is by accident? Do you really think Israel and the United States are at greater risk because of this chaos, and do you really think we have nothing to do with this chaos?

I will await your well reasoned answer.

Sal wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:He was told this would happen....

So was Dubya.

And, that was before we invaded, smashed everything, and unleashed the forces and dynamics we see coming to a head today.

Nobody can put the genie back into the bottle.

Uh, "W" then listened to his generals and did the SURGE which brought stability to the country. The "O" pissed it all away in less than three years.

Uh, "W" then listened to his generals and did the SURGE which brought stability to the country. The "O" pissed it all away in less than three years.


What stability? There never was a stable political solution. There was simply an American occupation. An occupation which NEVER resolved the underlying political differences.

2seaoat wrote:Uh, "W" then listened to his generals and did the SURGE which brought stability to the country. The "O" pissed it all away in less than three years.


What stability?   There never was a stable political solution.   There was simply an American occupation.   An occupation which NEVER resolved the underlying political differences.

Once again for the very S-L-O-W!

Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.

"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.
- Former President Clinton Wednesday, April 16, 2003

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."
- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010

How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going? How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President? Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities. Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Is45Jwqizc

And now the Obama administration wants to TAKE CREDIT for the Iraq war…whew….

Non responsive. Answer the question. Is the Chaos in the middle east good for American Foreign policy or bad? Do you really think any of this is by accident?

Do you notice that you often infer that you have some superior insight into the topic instead of actually producing facts?

Here's a clue... that isn't actually arguing or debating... or even a conversation. It's a narcissistic power trip.

you're welcome.

I actually do have a superior insight. I make no apologies for the same. If you want to try to debate the same.......answer the question. Is chaos in the Middle east in the interest of America and our lead ally Israel?

I am sorry. I make no apology for that superior insight, and if you fail to understand the same, and chose to run or give a brief nonsensical answer.....go for it, but I make no apology for knowledge.

It's a cheap tactic. You use it in lew of working knowledge. No one buys it... some one should've told you earlier.

You don't learn talking... or talking over people.

I am not the one running from the clear question. You are. I am not the one talking over anybody. You are. You lack the intellectual ability and integrity to even try to answer a clear question which gets to the substance of Middle East Policy. You run away like you do on every subject. A short nonsensical answer. No substance. No facts. No concepts. Just nihilist doubletalk which is consistently called out by the poor souls who do possess intellectual tools which make it clear that you have no answers, have no skills to actually discuss an issue, and consistently run away. Prove me wrong. Answer the question.

I say what I think mostly... if facts are used there's a link. Nobody that talks as much as you could've learned very much.

That's kinda sad when you think about it.

I make no apologies for my intellect. None. Answer the question. If President Obama is in charge of a broken foreign policy, is chaos in the middle east nation states a good thing for American interests and our chief ally Israel? I may learn when you have something to offer, but honestly you have been a huge disappointment from my expectations. I actually thought you had higher level conceptual thinking. You have proved that assumption wrong too many times to count. Answer the simple question. Prove me wrong that you have any grasp of international relations and American primary interests.

boards of FL wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

boards of FL wrote:Republicans critiquing the mid-east policy of others.

Say it out loud a few times.

Democrats who thought they could do it better and have created an entire region that hates the United States even after their messiah went on his world apology tour.

Say it until you are blue in the face.

Actually, democrats provided the voice of opposition to the $1.1 trillion dollar war waged by republicans that netted us absolutely nothing.

I'll say it again.  Republicans - the people who lead us into the $1.1 trillion dollar war that served to destabilize the mid-east - are now critiquing the mid-east policy of others.  Say that out loud a few times.

Yes. It's always better when Democrats can wage an unsanctioned war where there's no accountability for the billions of dollars spent or the number of innocent bystanders killed when you carpet bomb a country without Congressional approval.

I'll say that again. It's always better when Democrats can wage an unsanctioned war where there's no accountability for the billions of dollars spent or the number of innocent bystanders killed when you carpet bomb a country without Congressional approval.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THbvc3lx2pk

 

Simple, trying to make decisions concerning international affairs and leaders with the experience and training of a Community Organizer for ACORN.