"American alliance is worth nothing..."

#52
#52
That's how it appears on the outside I would agree. I have zero clue what our goverment does abroad and what we have said behind closed doors for the past two decades. For all I know, Obama could be taking steps to solve all these problems but none of it will ever see the light of day. This probably isn't the case but what we see is drastically different from the real facts and circumstances. However what I have noticed and what I have seen is our country and specifically republicans completely go out of their way to undermine EVERYTHING the man says or does. So to me the instability and second guessing of our allies starts and originates on our own soil with our own politicans.

Syria: What should he have done? He threaten them but didn't send Americans to die. I wouldn't have either.
So bush would he have bombed Assad and then sent thousands of Americans to another ME country? There is no correct way to fix or respond to those conflict zones.

I get what you're saying, it's easy to say. It's not easy to navigate when you're the president.

We're lucky the Republicans have been in his way on many things.

On Syria, it's not that he didn't do anything. He f-ed that up by making the threat THEN didn't do anything. His foreign policy is nothing but short sighted and reactionary. A POTUS cannot draw a line in the sand and NOT back it up.
 
#53
#53
Yep, I really wish someone would come along and want these changes.
As for the voting. Do you think it would be beneficial if we had a 100 % participation in elections?

Good lord no!
 
#54
#54
Yep.. That was a bad time . By far the worse I can recall during my lifetime.

Back to the reason I asked the question. Essentially, wasn't he forced to do it? So the last American president to single handedly do something beneficial for you and I can't really be narrowed down?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#55
#55
We're lucky the Republicans have been in his way on many things.

On Syria, it's not that he didn't do anything. He f-ed that up by making the threat THEN didn't do anything. His foreign policy is nothing but short sighted and reactionary. A POTUS cannot draw a line in the sand and NOT back it up.

Yep all bark and no bite. I get that but I would say that if you are a country and you aren't scared of America and our capabilities you might be clueless. He didn't back up what he said but if he HAD to, I think he would. Syria wasn't about to bomb america so like you said he should have kept his mouth shut.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#56
#56
That's how it appears on the outside I would agree. I have zero clue what our goverment does abroad and what we have said behind closed doors for the past two decades. For all I know, Obama could be taking steps to solve all these problems but none of it will ever see the light of day. This probably isn't the case but what we see is drastically different from the real facts and circumstances. However what I have noticed and what I have seen is our country and specifically republicans completely go out of their way to undermine EVERYTHING the man says or does. So to me the instability and second guessing of our allies starts and originates on our own soil with our own politicans.

What are the chances that he, someone who is completely inept and has surrounded himself with political cronies and other inept people, is fixing the world's problems under the table?

You would think in almost six years he might have had at least one foreign policy win. And other than Bin Laden, which was started way before he came into office so the credit isn't his fully, he has yet to accomplish anything significant on the world stage. Everything he has done either ends up being completely wrong or just falls flat.

Syria: What should he have done? He threaten them but didn't send Americans to die. I wouldn't have either.
So bush would he have bombed Assad and then sent thousands of Americans to another ME country? There is no correct way to fix or respond to those conflict zones.

I do beg to differ on the "threats" as we had the red line that was sometimes pink, blue, moved or otherwise not even there. You don't open your mouth about things like that and end up not following through since, again, it destroys your credibility.

And have the Russians followed up on their end of the deal?

I get what you're saying, it's easy to say. It's not easy to navigate when you're the president.

Surely you are joking (no Airplane references please) that he cannot be decisive and bold? Or continue blaming his predecessor for everything wrong in the world? Or the great "reset" button with Russia that's now a joke of the international community. And the Middle East is still the kitty litter box and we've managed to alienate countries that typically stand by us as they don't believe we can or will help them.

Again, he has zero wins so far in the international community. And I don't see a track record of that changing in the next two years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#57
#57
Back to the reason I asked the question. Essentially, wasn't he forced to do it? So the last American president to single handedly do something beneficial for you and I can't really be narrowed down?

A President shouldn't have the power to single handily do anything. Except during a time of severe national crisis like an invasion.
 
#58
#58
Yep all bark and no bite. I get that but I would say that if you are a country and you aren't scared of America and our capabilities you might be clueless. He didn't back up what he said but if he HAD to, I think he would.

Okay, name me one country right now that is afraid of our current President or even treats him as an equal much less the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. Or actually believes he would back up anything he says.
 
#59
#59
Yep all bark and no bite. I get that but I would say that if you are a country and you aren't scared of America and our capabilities you might be clueless. He didn't back up what he said but if he HAD to, I think he would.

Only one man can enforce our military mite and if the rest of the world believes him to be meek, we are as nation are weak.
 
#60
#60
A President shouldn't have the power to single handily do anything. Except during a time of severe national crisis like an invasion.

That is exactly why I don't say things like Obama is the whole reason our country sucks. It's not just him but all of them. Yet everyone points to him and nothing changes because we don't hold the rest of them accountable. Republicans, democrats and Obama are all responsible for our failures as country.
 
#61
#61
That is exactly why I don't say things like Obama is the whole reason our country sucks. It's not just him but all of them. Yet everyone points to him and nothing changes because we don't hold the rest of them accountable. Republicans, democrats and Obama are all responsible for our failures as country.

Very true but he asked for the job.
 
#63
#63
Okay, name me one country right now that is afraid of our current President or even treats him as an equal much less the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. Or actually believes he would back up anything he says.

You're right, Obama isn't the manliest man in the world. He doesn't use photo ops with his shirt off while riding a bear to fasley portray his superior characteristics.
So both you and hog believe that if others think we are weak, we essentially are weak?

Whereas, I believe if any nation or man felt froggy and wanted to leap at our country. We would have no problem puttin them in their place. Regardless who our president is.
 
#66
#66
You're right, Obama isn't the manliest man in the world. He doesn't use photo ops with his shirt off while riding a bear to fasley portray his superior characteristics.

Not sure the mommy jeans would show up that well in the photographs of him riding a bear.

C'mon, a little funny at least?

So both you and hog believe that if others think we are weak, we essentially are weak?

I think the perception is there that is others think we are weak, they will strike at us believing we will not strike in return. You think about what happened in Benghazi. Not discussing the domestic angle, how many nations in the world would have let that pass? How many would have leveled several city blocks looking for the ones that were responsible? How many nations would have restrained their military from responding when they were positioned like ours was?

How many nations would have let one of the supposed leaders of that incident roam freely and even give TV interviews for a year before finally snatching him up?

So yes, the overwhelming fact that we are perceived as weak translates into a loss of stature and position in the world stage. When you continue to cut your military, allow other leaders in the world to dictate terms, fail to show proper leadership, draw lines in the sand that aren't kept and generally have zero influence in the international discourse, the world will perceive your nation as weak as one person represents the nation.

Whereas, I believe if any nation or man felt froggy and wanted to leap at our country. We would have no problem puttin them in their place. Regardless who our president is.

It's happened, see above. And I hope and pray it won't happen again since I feel our response would be extremely limited at best.
 
#68
#68
Well of course he has. He's the president of the United States. We aren't known for caring about anyone or any country. If he were bending over backwards for the polish; he'd be blamed for something else. Instead he's ruined the world because OBAMA. You people ***** about everything he does and really couldn't do anything better. You all have the answers supposedly but yet haven't been elected to any offices.

Not defending Obama in anyway. But I am smart enough to know that everything that happens in the world isn't Obama fault. He's nothing but a puppet just like every single other president we have had or will have in the future.

About your last paragraph:
1) Yes you are.
2) No you aren't.
3) Valerie Jarrett approves your message.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#71
#71
I'll go over a list of five things that someone could do over night that would reverse the course of our country and put us back to life liberty and justice for all.

1 tax code reform: we all pay the same. No tax breaks for anyone or any company. Don't burden people by taking what isn't yours. Simple enough for kids to understand but not ole Uncle Sam.

2 Stop spending money to put people in jail and then allowing another person to profit off of their incarceration. Aka end the drug war: punish people through treatment and then resolve their addictive personality issues. Which is the real problem in the first place; not the drug that they are using. Weed was put here by our creator and has been deemed illegal by propaganda. Wether you like it or not.
Same goes for prostitution. We would have no pimps and prosititues, no mass abductions and end the sexual slave trade going on within our own boarders. Simply by regulating and letting grown ass adults make their own decisions.

3 Transparency in our gov: the phrase we all came to love under Obama. It's not even close to happening and never will.

4 stop funding and spreading weapons throughout the world.

5 election reform: you vote and you get a percentage or two knocked off of your income tax. He'll make it worth going to vote!

It's actually easier than that. Fair tax and term limits. Both depoliticize DC.
 
#72
#72
Not so much the good that they do but the damage they don't do.

With a nation of 350 million it basically comes down to that. Don't screw it up!
However I listed five things that anyone of the past presidents could have addressed. Yet they didn't and won't. Which to me shows that all of them are garbage.
 
#73
#73
You're right, Obama isn't the manliest man in the world. He doesn't use photo ops with his shirt off while riding a bear to fasley portray his superior characteristics.
So both you and hog believe that if others think we are weak, we essentially are weak?

Whereas, I believe if any nation or man felt froggy and wanted to leap at our country. We would have no problem puttin them in their place. Regardless who our president is.

If the world believes the President is weak and unwilling to follow through on threats, then we as a country will be perceived as weak and will be challenged.

No country in their right mind would attack/invade the continental US regardless of who is in the oval office.
 
#74
#74
If the world believes the President is weak and unwilling to follow through on threats, then we as a country will be perceived as weak and will be challenged.

No country in their right mind would attack/invade the continental US regardless of who is in the oval office.

Then in my mind who cares what they think. I care about our allies and if we haven't helped a country when they needed us that's unacceptable. Outside of Benghazi, if he would have never drawn a line what would the problem be?
 

VN Store



Back
Top