Jimmy Carter -Obama Blew It

[BRU]

I was most surprised by Carter calling for troops on the ground....not sure if he meant ours tho; he wasn't clear on that....

“We waited too long. We let the Islamic State build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” he said, using an alternate name for the terrorist group. “Then when [ISIL] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

Carter said Obama’s air campaign against ISIL in Iraq has “a possibility of success,” provided that some troops are available on the ground. He did not specify whether he meant U.S. or other ground forces.​

"You have to have somebody on the ground to direct our missiles and to be sure you have the right target," Carter said. "Then you have to have somebody to move in and be willing to fight ISIS after the strikes."​

but then he went on ....and in a nice way, basically said Obama is a big fat failure on foreign policy

More broadly, Carter criticized Obama's foreign policy, an approach that he says is lacking in "positive action."

The former Democratic president and Georgia governor also said the president has shifted his Middle East policy on several occasions.

“It changes from time to time,” he said of the president’s Middle East strategy. “I noticed that two of his secretaries of defense, after they got out of office, were very critical of the lack of positive action on the part of the president”​

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/08/politics/jimmy-carter-obama-isis/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

[Hummingbirdlvr3]

That just about says it all if Jimmy says that Obama's a flop with foreign policy. No positive action puts it mildly , can't get any milder than Jimmy.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

you're right. we don't know if he's calling for U.S. troops on the ground or the bordering countries' troops.
which do you think he means?

also, do you think when he says Middle East, he means Israel/Palestinian peace talks?

 

[fairsheet]

If we're EVER to reduce our role as "world's policemen" and scale down our spending on guns vs. butter, this sort of criticism is inevitable. Carter, Panetta,Rice, and whomever Fox-else, are farting from the context of yesterday's American/world view, when it was expected that America should be held militarily responsible for any and all of the world's ills.

It seems most all of these armchair experts are having one helluva time comprehending that perhaps Obama's reticence to go all in, is by design, rather then some function of weakness or incompetence.

 

[ya-ta-hey]

I was most surprised by Carter calling for troops on the ground....not sure if he meant ours tho; he wasn't clear on that....

“We waited too long. We let the Islamic State build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” he said, using an alternate name for the terrorist group. “Then when [ISIL] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

Carter said Obama’s air campaign against ISIL in Iraq has “a possibility of success,” provided that some troops are available on the ground. He did not specify whether he meant U.S. or other ground forces.​

"You have to have somebody on the ground to direct our missiles and to be sure you have the right target," Carter said. "Then you have to have somebody to move in and be willing to fight ISIS after the strikes."​

but then he went on ....and in a nice way, basically said Obama is a big fat failure on foreign policy

More broadly, Carter criticized Obama's foreign policy, an approach that he says is lacking in "positive action."

The former Democratic president and Georgia governor also said the president has shifted his Middle East policy on several occasions.

“It changes from time to time,” he said of the president’s Middle East strategy. “I noticed that two of his secretaries of defense, after they got out of office, were very critical of the lack of positive action on the part of the president”​

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/08/politics/jimmy-carter-obama-isis/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Ms. Bru,

Carter is just giddy that the title of "Worst President" is no longer his.

 

[fairsheet]

If we're EVER to reduce our role as "world's policemen" and scale down our spending on guns vs. butter, this sort of criticism is inevitable. Carter, Panetta,Rice, and whomever Fox-else, are farting from the context of yesterday's American/world view, when it was expected that America should be held militarily responsible for any and all of the world's ills.

It seems most all of these armchair experts are having one helluva time comprehending that perhaps Obama's reticence to go all in, is by design, rather then some function of weakness or incompetence.

Democrats AND Republicans, oft-times from their own different perspectives, have been calling upon America to draw back its world/military role, for decades now. I can't help but wonder what in the hell they thought it would "look like", when we actually DID that?

All these old farts remind me of the retired auto mechanic who would insist that GM was incompetent when it replaced carburetors with fuel injection.

 

[BRU]

you're right. we don't know if he's calling for U.S. troops on the ground or the bordering countries' troops.
which do you think he means?

also, do you think when he says Middle East, he means Israel/Palestinian peace talks?

No I think he means what he says..........

“We waited too long. We let the Islamic State build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” he said, using an alternate name for the terrorist group. “Then when [ISIL] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

 

[BRU]

Ms. Bru,

Carter is just giddy that the title of "Worst President" is no longer his.

could be...

 

[BRU]

If we're EVER to reduce our role as "world's policemen" and scale down our spending on guns vs. butter, this sort of criticism is inevitable. Carter, Panetta,Rice, and whomever Fox-else, are farting from the context of yesterday's American/world view, when it was expected that America should be held militarily responsible for any and all of the world's ills.

It seems most all of these armchair experts are having one helluva time comprehending that perhaps Obama's reticence to go all in, is by design, rather then some function of weakness or incompetence.

I think Obama's only resistance to go 'all in' is that he campaigned on 'ending the war' ...he boasted about 'ending the war' and he's trying to be the 'hero'...there is no design...there is only weakness AND incompetence in Obama's case.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

No I think he means what he says..........

“We waited too long. We let the Islamic State build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” he said, using an alternate name for the terrorist group. “Then when [ISIL] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

which ground troops do you think he means......ours or other country's?

 

[BRU]

which ground troops do you think he means......ours or other country's?

I think I answered that in the top post......

"not sure if he meant ours tho; he wasn't clear on that...." ?

BUT...."You have to have somebody on the ground to direct our missiles" HINTS...at ours.

and ....“If we keep on working in Iraq and have some ground troops to follow up when we do our bombing, there is a possibility of success”

 

[JuliefromOhio]

I think I answered that in the top post......

"not sure if he meant ours tho; he wasn't clear on that...." ?

BUT...."You have to have somebody on the ground to direct our missiles" HINTS...at ours.

and ....“If we keep on working in Iraq and have some ground troops to follow up when we do our bombing, there is a possibility of success”

I think Carter meant ground troops other than our own. granted, I know we need our special forces/intel on the ground, but not our "ground troops" in the traditional sense.
I don't want our troops fighting ISIS on the ground and dying for countries that refuse to engage in the fight.

 

[BRU]

I think Carter meant ground troops other than our own. granted, I know we need our special forces/intel on the ground, but not our "ground troops" in the traditional sense.
I don't want our troops fighting ISIS on the ground and dying for countries that refuse to engage in the fight.

He certainly didn't imply that.

"If we keep on working in Iraq and have some ground troops to follow up when we do our bombing, there is a possibility of success”

but just because that's what you think doesn't mean that's what he thinks.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

He certainly didn't imply that.

"If we keep on working in Iraq and have some ground troops to follow up when we do our bombing, there is a possibility of success”

but just because that's what you think doesn't mean that's what he thinks.

so what do YOU think Carter meant?

earlier, you said: "not sure if he meant ours tho; he wasn't clear on that...." ?

 

[gigi]

Clearly Carter is a racist who makes up stuff to say about Obama because he has a passionate and irrational hatred of him.

 

[Jen]

Ms. Bru,

Carter is just giddy that the title of "Worst President" is no longer his.

I am pretty certain that that is part of it.
Obama has far surpassed Carter as worst president.
At least Carter worked hard at doing things honestly............ while honesty is something that Obama obviously doesn't care about at all.

 

[BRU]

so what do YOU think Carter meant?

earlier, you said: "not sure if he meant ours tho; he wasn't clear on that...." ?

and ? I don't know what he meant but I know what he implied. Sorry this is so difficult for you Jules. I think it would just ruin your day if the Humanitarian Jimmy Carter called for US troops on the ground tho.