Posted on 10/02/2015 7:42:32 PM PDT by aught-6
President Obama defended his response to the growing crisis in Syria on Friday by pointing to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, cautioning against a commitment that risks drawing the U.S. into a new quagmire in the Middle East.
Obama appeared determined to take on critics whom he portrayed as impatient and ignorant of the complexity of the warring factions in Syria. He laughed off suggestions that Russian airstrikes in recent days against fighters opposed to President Bashar Assad, an ally of Moscows, have President Vladimir Putin looking stronger than Obama in Syria.
Were not going to make Syria into a proxy war between the United States and Russia, Obama insisted during an afternoon news conference at the White House. This is not some superpower chessboard contest. And anybody who frames it in that way isnt paying very close attention to whats been happening on the chessboard"
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
And the caddy says, "none of them lie like you, Mr. President".
Were not going to make Syria into a proxy war between the United States and Russia, Obama insisted during an afternoon news conference at the White House. This is not some superpower chessboard contest. And anybody who frames it in that way isnt paying very close attention to whats been happening on the chessboard..."
LOL!
Yeah, that's what Russia is there for: to stop those terrorists and governments bent on the destruction of Israel and America.
Well, except for..
Russia is there to increase its power in the ME in alliance with our enemies. It's not "We're from Russia and we're here to help." They are the enemy.
He's gonna feel bad but I'll be in a good mood.
Maybe he really is losing his crumby marbles.
Metaphors sometimes tend to lead slower readers away from reality. There’s no checkmate. Clear the mind of any game or silly metaphors for a moment. There’s really no Obama involved in military decisions. Like Putin, he only puts the rubber stamp to what military leaders advise. There’s no Obama or Putin with any substantial involvement.
Now, look at what has happened and is really happening in Syria. It’s going to go on and on, whether pro-enemy fascists like it or not.
True. But many of us didn't support him; at worst it's nothing more than guilt by association.
Looks like super power chess to me.
Rest assured, Obama is not deploying them to benefit the American People.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3344111/posts
I think I have to disagree with you there.
About 30% of the military problem is budget; the other 70% is the simple fact that you can’t lower standards so that QUEERS,LESBIANS, TRANSGENDERED FREAKS, WOMEN WHO CAN’T DO THE JOB, and all the other ALPHABET SOUP protected species can get what they call their “FAIR SHARE” of the promotions.
He had a different view in 2011, the Arab Spring was to be his crowning glory.
Excepts (MAN that was a long speech!):
I count on Hillary every single day, and I believe that she will go down as one of the finest Secretaries of State in our nations history.
The State Department is a fitting venue to mark a new chapter in American diplomacy. For six months, we have witnessed an extraordinary change taking place in the Middle East and North Africa....And though these countries may be a great distance from our shores, we know that our own future is bound to this region by the forces of economics and security, by history and by faith....
The question before us is what role America will play as this story unfolds.... I believed then - and I believe now - that we have a stake not just in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals....
So we face a historic opportunity...
.... At a time when the people of the Middle East and North Africa are casting off the burdens of the past, the drive for a lasting peace that ends the conflict and resolves all claims is more urgent than ever. Thats certainly true for the two parties involved....
.... And now we cannot hesitate to stand squarely on the side of those who are reaching for their rights, knowing that their success will bring about a world that is more peaceful, more stable, and more just.
“Russia is there to increase its power in the ME in alliance with our enemies. It’s not “We’re from Russia and we’re here to help.” They are the enemy.”
Perhaps people from our side should have thought about that when GUTTING OUR MILITARY, instead of spending all our time on Chick-A-Fill and condoms for Sandra Fluke. I don’t recall ONE SIGNIFICANT REPUBLICAN complaining about what was happening to our military, much less using control of Congress to challenge what the President was doing to it.
A little late now...be we can at least watch how it’s done.
We don’t know when Russia will stop, but much of the West deserves it. We had 20 years of what we called a “Peace Dividend”, while Russia spent 20 years buying Western Technology and building up their military.
Until we’re ready to again PLAY BALL in military spending, the safest thing for us to do is sit back and hope Putin doesn’t take too many countries. It certainly beats getting defeated, or losing cities.
“Its amazing how little you get for half a trillion per year from our military. What makes you think a full trillion a year would get us any more?”
It worked in the past. There are certain percentages of military spending relative to GNP. To put it in basic terms, when we get below 3% (1930s, late 1940s, etc.) we find ourselves getting into wars. When we’re above 5% (Cold War, Reagan Buildup, etc.) we are RESPECTED and wind up not even needing to use our military.
We’re now below 3%, AND IT SHOWS with Russia and China on the march. The “peace dividend” only works if ALL SIDES play by its rules. The other sides didn’t, and we didn’t care...and now we’re PAYING THE PRICE.
If you’re suggesting that rather than a chess match this is some kind of a round of golf then mister you better have a talk with your caddy because you’ve obviously sliced you’re approach into the 5th hole fairway bunkers here at Augusta.
Percent of GNP has nothing to do with it.
Again, Russia has a much smaller military budget. They are able to further their national interests with that.
Our problem is that we waste our military budget. We cannot do half the job with 10 times the budget if we have widespread rent seeking, political generals, cheating contractors, and social engineering.
If you increase the military budget before fixing the military it’s money down a rathole.
500 billion plus annually ought to buy us an effective fighting force. That it doesn’t is BS.
Where does the money go that they have now? Nobody knows.
Leadership is definitely the biggest problem. No increase in budget is big enough to overcome that.
Queen Putt’s chin has become long term parking for Vlad’s ‘nads.
I hear that Queen Putt is still just a JV "catcher", even though he practiced a lot on the Saudi king. I'm sure Vlads nads have had better...
Go RUN FOR OFFICE and fix it then. Otherwise you just sound like a whiner.
I’m willing to accept the fact that there will always be $800 toilet seats, etc. and simply move on from there...just as Reagan and FDR did when it was necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.