Skip to comments.Rudderless U.S. foreign policy - Obama stands by as tyranny spreads
Posted on 07/29/2014 7:29:45 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
From the Middle East to Eurasia, it often seems that President Obama is reacting to events instead of trying to shape them. Americans have begun to see his collective failures as an indictment on his presidency, and they long for clarity and purpose from their president.
The clear foreign policy that is grounded in American ideas of promoting liberty abroad and preserving our security at home is what is needed now. That is how we became a superpower. Reversing these ideas allows our adversaries to become stronger and impairs our ability to respond to present-day threats.
While Mr. Obamas foreign-policy adventures have waxed and waned in the eyes of the American public, his indecisiveness in places such as Iraq and Syria has presented an image of weakness on the global stage. We have failed to adequately deal with Russian aggression in Georgia and Ukraine. Recognizing that the United States would soon be changing administrations, Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. ....Russias Vladimir Putin sensed our weakness and saw opportunity. Six years later, he annexed Crimea and now pro-Russian forces are trying to take over more land in Ukraine.
What has the Obama administration done in response to this aggression by Russia? Not really much, other than impose toothless sanctions on Russian businessmen close to Mr. Putin (but not the Russian president himself) that have done little to make Russia change course. Is this what Ronald Reagan would have done? Or would he have helped pro-democracy Ukrainians and pressed Europe to look for alternatives to Russian natural gas to preclude being held hostage by Russian energy? Additionally, we need to reinforce our commitments to NATO and get the former components of the Soviet Union involved. Otherwise, Mr. Putin will do this again.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Well, he’s a tyrant himself, so...
Obama’s too busy spreading tyranny at home.
Not too concerned with the rest of the world...we have enough within our own borders.
- 0bama helping Central America invade the United States
- ISIS overtaking Iraq
- Hamas attacking Israel
..and that's just for starters
0bama is like a deer in the headlights.
Caron’s a good guy and I’m sure that it feels great to vent at both 0bama and our old Cold War foe at the same time, but poor Ben is terrible at geopolitics.
If you are unfamiliar with the chess term “stabilizing the board” then you might not realize that Carson’s advice to 0bama on Russia/Ukraine is out of sequence.
That means that it is now bad advice, whereas if that advice had been given *before* Putin seized the Crimea the same advice would have been spot on.
Timing matters. You don’t send in your ground troops and *then* shell your artillery onto the enemies’ trenches. The sequence in which you make geopolitical moves is important.
Sequence matters. You shell the enemy’s trenches first, and *then* send in your troops, for example.
Carson is advising the opposite sequence.
Bad idea...yet few people will understand why “bad advice” today would have been “good advice” to do in January.
Most people do not grasp that sequence matters.
Hence my tag line.
“Deer in the headlights”?? Hardly. All this is architected by the bastard.
Let's say you have amazing intestinal fortitude. Could you have secured MH17 site with the 173rd Airborne and the Royal Dutch Marines? If yes, how? If not, why? Just very curious.
And that's just in the US.....
He’s not standing by he’s fanning the flames.
It is clear that Ø's purpose is to advance a global Caliphate.
You can do lots of things, but the *cost* in labor, money, time, equipment, and lives increases based upon (among other things) the length of your supply lines versus the length of your opponent’s.
MH17 was quite close to Russian supply bases, and quite far from U.S. supply bases...and with only 1 American on board, MH17 was a minor U.S. “interest” compared to those of Russia.
Which is to point out that volunteering to over-extend your military for a trivial national interest is generally considered to be unwise.
Carson correctly points out that if we don’t act now, Putin will take even more territory. We need to take the initiative and force Putin to react to our moves.
> Hes not standing by hes fanning the flames.
Hell he started the fire then threw gasoline on it...
Life doesn’t work like that. IF it mattered to stop Putin from taking more territory, you would have needed to act *prior* to Putin taking Crimea.
Instead, acting *after* Putin took the Crimea puts the U.S. “behind the curve” in military terms. Being behind the curve means that you have to make predictable, costly, or desperate moves...and your likelihood of success is small.
Right now, it is too late for Ukraine/Crimea. However, we could act now to shore up Poland and Germany.
Acting now for Ukraine/Crimea *instead* of shoring up Poland/Germany means that you could lose far more than (parts of) the Ukraine.
You have to stabilize the board at this point. Ground is lost because we got behind the curve. Getting more behind the curve will cost us more countries.
You’ll lose Poland and Germany if you waste efforts on the Ukraine at this point.