- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Obama supporters: What do you like about Obama's middle east foreign policy?
Posted on 10/7/14 at 7:11 pm to 2014Tigers
Posted on 10/7/14 at 7:11 pm to 2014Tigers
quote:
Big12fan
It seems really stupid to me that Your president Obama would not try and agree on a status of forces agreement with then Al Maliki. It seems really stupid to me that his actions are speaking for itself, as in, he does not care about our border(which terrorist will exploit) He doesnt care that they are growing at a staggering rate and does not want to take the fight to them. These airstrikes are not doing anything because HE TELEGRAPHS EVERYTHING. This is the most uninterested, moronic POTUS I have ever seen. The worst in History.
He is also your president. But no use arguing that.
At what point do you cut the apron strings with Maliki's Mafia? Had we not done so, he would still be PM but Obama's mistake was allowing him to stay in office. And at what point, after spending $18 billion on training & equipping a Shiite army, would they have been self-sufficient enough to defend themselves?
And you do realize that many of the ISIS & other radical Sunni groups are led by seasoned Bathist commanders who were thrown to the dogs by the Bush administration.
The entire fiasco from before the troops ever hit the ground in Iraq was the result of an administration being duped by Iranian agents, like Chalabi, whose intelligence the CIA relied on.
Is Obama a good wartime president? No. It isn't his strength and I'm sure he'd like to run away from this problem. But you can characterize his reluctance to further engage ISIS any way you want, but the truth is that an invasion of Iraq/Syria will not solve the problem of the middle east, but will only fuel the hatred and want for revenge that already exists.
It is time for other countries who have more at risk, have capable militaries, and are a relative short distance from the areas of conflicts. Our military does not need to sacrifice in order to save those who can save themselves. There is finally some signs of unity among the surrounding countries. Fear does that. Well, when the fear gets stronger, the other countries will either have to act or get swallowed up. I really doubt that ISIS will succeed in exporting their brutality beyond Iraq and Syria. If so, so be it.
This post was edited on 10/7/14 at 7:14 pm
0
Posted on 10/7/14 at 7:47 pm to 2014Tigers
quote:It seems really stupid to me that people constantly pretend Obama was the issue here and not the Sadrists that Maliki brought into his coalition to get a ruling majority in 2010 (and who would have immediately pulled their support under any SOFA).
It seems really stupid to me that Your president Obama would not try and agree on a status of forces agreement with then Al Maliki.
LINK
This post was edited on 10/7/14 at 7:49 pm
Posted on 10/7/14 at 7:53 pm to Iosh
quote:Aside from the fact that of course "Obama was the issue here," you may have a point.
It seems really stupid to me that people constantly pretend Obama was the issue here
Posted on 10/7/14 at 7:56 pm to NC_Tigah
Yeah, a REAL LEADER would've just... what? Installed Allawi as PM by force?
Posted on 10/7/14 at 8:04 pm to Iosh
quote:Led.
Yeah, a REAL LEADER would've just... what?
Panetta matter-of-factly states the reason we did not have a SOFA with 24K Troops to ensure stability is because Obama did not want them there. Period.
He said the advice to Obama to keep troops in place was unanimous from the Secretary of State, Sec of Defense, and head of the CIA.
Obama wanted the troops out for a 2012 Election talking point.
This post was edited on 10/7/14 at 8:06 pm
Posted on 10/7/14 at 8:21 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:Panetta is making grist for Hillary 2016, nothing more. Let's look at what he's actually saying: LINK
Panetta matter-of-factly states the reason we did not have a SOFA with 24K Troops to ensure stability is because Obama did not want them there. Period.
quote:Again, Maliki was PM of Iraq only because he had the support of the Sadrist bloc, which would have revolted at any residual SOFA. What Panetta is saying here, essentially, is that Maliki would have risked his position of power for the good of his country (where "the good of his country" is defined as some F-16s.)
The White House has argued it could not convince then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to come to terms.
But Panetta told CNN the White House did not use its power to pressure al-Maliki enough.
"What I'm saying is that Maliki was the kind of leader that you had to constantly put pressure on to direct him in the right direction," he said. "We had, with Iraq -- made a commitment with regards to military assistance, F-16 fighter planes, other types of military aid, that I think if we had said, 'Look, you know, if you're not gonna give us -- the agreement that we need to maintain our forces there, you know, we may not provide this kind of assistance."
The White House, he said, needed to do more "to try to push him."
"You need to threaten guys like that, who won't come along. And everybody knew that," he said. "I think what happened was -- is that because Maliki kept resisting this effort, that there was a sense that, 'Look, why should we want this more than the Iraqis want this?' And if they're -- if they're putting up a fuss about this, then -- we might as well just pick up and leave."
We don't need to speculate on whether this is wrong. We know this is wrong. Because earlier this year Maliki lost a third of his fricking territory to ISIS and he still had to be politely shoved out the door by his Iranian enablers and a semi-coup from his own Daawa Party. Maliki is and was not a "good of the country" type of guy. Let me give you his hypothetical response to Panetta's hypothetical threat: LINK
This post was edited on 10/7/14 at 8:22 pm
Posted on 10/7/14 at 8:30 pm to Iosh
Obama is also cutting Officers from the military that are currently in Afghanistan, now you tell me what this is going to accomplish. No respect, no heart towards our soldiers. All Obama is doing is playing politics with it just to keep the Senate for Democrats. Which is all a sign of he does not give a shite about our military or the country. I hope you fools that voted for him twice feel good about yourselves. Our military was once feared heavily throughout the world. Now, countries brush us off like flies.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 8:40 pm to Iosh
quote:No what Panetta is saying is, had Obama led, al-Maliki would have had no choice but to follow. That is what a leader does.
What Panetta is saying here, essentially, is that Maliki would have risked his position of power
We don't need to speculate on whether this is right. We know this is right. Because earlier this year Maliki was politely shoved out the door by this Administration.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 8:44 pm to mizzoukills
Peace overtures towards Iran, nothing else.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 8:46 pm to mizzoukills
I like that he supported the muslim brotherhood in egypt, which ultimately led to their destruction.
I like that he supported rebels in libya and syria.
I like that he destabilized the entire region and it's closer to exploding than ever.
I like to think that this will cause them to kill each other off and maybe after the dust settles we can go in and sanitize what's left and start building walmarts.
I like that he supported rebels in libya and syria.
I like that he destabilized the entire region and it's closer to exploding than ever.
I like to think that this will cause them to kill each other off and maybe after the dust settles we can go in and sanitize what's left and start building walmarts.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 10:20 pm to mizzoukills
I was not aware of any ME policy, maybe kneejerk put your finger in the political winds policy but no ME policy, if you have the pertinent points to his ME policy list them so we can discuss. 
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News