Barrack moves into action!
Im glad we're bringing up Bush since he's running again.It's funny that candidate Obama is criticized for vacationing during this crisis while the sitting President, well, um, well, he um, see, he was um:
Oh wait....youre one of the guys who believes they're the same person.
Yes, well the reactions of the sitting President are far less significant right now than the hypothetical responses of the candidates to succeed him. . . .
Nah, not me, but a quality effort at assumption on your part.
I think htere are plenty of things to criticize both McCain and Obama about -- I just don't think that the Sun's criticisms of Obama in this situation are particularly meaningful. It's carries about the same weight with me as the nonsensical generalizations that lead to one calling Obama a socialist or McCain a neo-con.
What hypothetical? We saw their actual responses this past week. Unless you believe Obama would be different as President than how he is now.
Ha! Sorry to bust your Obama-bubble.
Explain to me what power is currently possessed by either McCain or Obama to change the course of events in Georgia? Until either has some power to make a difference there, they're responses are entirely hypothetical. To say nothing of the fact that it's absurd to believe that the rhetoric of a candidate running for office will absolutely match the actions of that individual should he or she be elected to that office. It's one thing for the candidate to say what he would or wouldn't do in the abstract -- there's an entirely different level of practicality that comes into play when other levels of advisors and other branches of government become involved in a scenario.
I agree that candidates will say or do anything to get elected, and most of the time they're just blowing smoke, but Obama versus McCain's response to this crisis demonstrates their fundamental differences on foreign policy.
Whats wrong is wrong and the president shouldn't be afraid to say so (insert Iraq War was WRONG rebuttal right here). Obama has no excuse for not seriously condemning the Russian agression as McCain did. McCain's the only one with the balls to stand up to Putin.
Because maybe we don't want to piss Russia off and want to work with them in the future.
Where does that end? To what extent is Russia aloud to do whatever it wants?
Oh, so if Obama had said that what the Russians did was really, really, really, really, really, really, really wrong and said that the American people were very, very, very, very, very, very, very mad, he'd have more of the foreign policy chops that you think a President needs?
I'm not sure how one guy saying "Russia must respect the sovereignity of other nations" is all that different from the other guy saying "Russia must respect the sovereignity of other nations and I really mean that and I'm going to be very mad if Russia doesn't respect the sovereignty of other nations because not respecting the sovereignity of other nations is indicative of poor values."
And, again, I'm not sure that the United States of America has exactly staked out the moral high ground when it comes to telling the nations of the world to respect the sovereignity of other governments.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 08-12-2008 at 12:08 PM.
You mean like the USA invasion of Iraq and regime change?
So Bush's invasion of Iraq means that its okay for the Putin to invade Georgia?
Im not suprised by this response. Anyone else who wants to stop talking about this conflict and debate about the legality of the Iraq War please take it to a thread from four years ago.
It is not ok for any country to invade another one with impunity. But no one in the US, least of all Bush has the right to say to Russia that their invasion is wrong, get out now and leave the peace loving people of Georgia alone after the US invaded Iraq and basically did the same thing.
Double standard FTMFW!
Who's calling for the double standard? Youre all okay with blasting Bush but not Putin?
Someone should blast Russia but it can't be us. What credibility do we have now on this issue?
It's funny that candidate Obama is criticized for vacationing during this crisis while the sitting President, well, um, well, he um, see, he was um:
Seriously...if Bush had any balls he'd be fighting communism and meeting with Putin face to face.
And the Russians have credibility?
You're an idiot...
This editorial form the Chicago Sun Times:
All the garbage rhetoric doesn't mean jack in the real world. Its nice that we got a clear shot of exactly what these two men are made of.McCain, not Obama, was right about Georgia
STEVE HUNTLEY [email protected]
Mention Georgia a few days ago, and most of us would have thought of the state evoked so sweetly in "Georgia on My Mind," the classic tune sung by Ray Charles. Very few of us had heard of the South Ossetia province of Georgia, the nation with the misfortune to have Russia as its neighbor, until war broke out last week.
Like Kosovo, Bosnia, Kuwait and other unfamiliar places before, Ossetia reminds us that a small, remote corner of the globe can explode into an international crisis. One who was up to speed on Georgia and the menace it faced from Russia was veteran Sen. John McCain. He had visited the Caucasian nation three times in a dozen years. When fighting erupted, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate got on the phone to gather details and issued a statement Friday summarizing the situation, tagging Russia as the aggressor and demanding it withdraw its forces from the sovereign territory of Georgia.
It took first-term Sen. Barack Obama three tries to get it right. Headed for a vacation in Hawaii, the presumed Democratic candidate for commander in chief issued an even-handed statement, urging restraint by both sides. Later Friday, he again called for mutual restraint but blamed Russia for the fighting. The next day his language finally caught up with toughness of McCain's.
Making matters worse, Obama's staff focused on a McCain aide who had served as a lobbyist for Georgia, charging it showed McCain was "ensconced in a lobbyist culture." Obama's campaign came off as injecting petty partisan politics into an international crisis. This was not a serious response on behalf a man who aspires to be the leader of the Free World. After all, what's so bad about representing a small former Soviet republic struggling to remake itself as a Western-style democracy?
The comparison between the two candidates served to emphasize the strength McCain's experience would bring to the White House in a dangerous world.
Obama's favored approach to international issues, diplomatic talks, failed to stop Russia's invasion. Vladimir Putin, a KGB bull in the former Soviet Union, wants to restore Russia as the supreme power of Eurasia and, to that end, bully former vassal states like Georgia out of their democratic ways. The fear is that Ukraine will come in his cross hairs next.
However the world's newest war ends, America's leadership must recognize and respond to the underlying dynamic of Russia's resurgent aggressive instincts -- the power bestowed on Moscow by its oil and gas riches.
While we don't get fossil fuels from Russia, Western Europe does, and the Kremlin's energy might is fueled by the worldwide demand for oil. Developing U.S. domestic energy sources and alternatives to oil will only enhance our national security and, by reducing the world's petroleum demand, undermine the economic, political and military advantage vast oil and gas reserves give to unfriendly powers like Russia, Iran and Venezuela.
Obama calls for transforming America's economy in a decade. He's got the right idea -- long term. But short term, this nation must push for energy security on all fronts -- now. That includes new offshore drilling for oil, which Obama loathes, and new nuclear plants, which he views with aversion. We can't just wait for breakthrough technologies for wind, solar and biomass energy.
McCain has got it right in advocating new offshore drilling and a federal push to add 45 nuclear generators over the next two decades. Given the evidence of Russia's energy-fueled aggression, he should abandon his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve and to extending subsidies he favors for nuclear energy to include renewables.
As Georgia burns, we need to light a fire under all the talk about energy security and start doing what it takes to make it happen.
you were gonna vote for him before this?
I was thinking about it. I read the Audacity of Hope back in May and thought he had some really good ideas.
Especially when it came to education.
But this campaign has shown me:
1) He's unbelievably arrogant
2) He's a typical politician
3) He doesn't have strong leadership skills
4) He'll back down from a fight thats not easy.
because you bolded some editorial writer's opinion, we have a clear shot of exactly what these two men are made of?
I think we've found talk radio's target audience.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
