Ukraine

[Jen]

We have no dog in that race.
I don't hate that Obama is keeping us out of it even though I don't like our President looking weak.
Maybe this stuff with Russia is a good reason to take a better look at Rand Paul and his isolationist views.

Ya think?

 

[connieb]

We have no dog in that race.
I don't hate that Obama is keeping us out of it even though I don't like our President looking weak.
Maybe this stuff with Russia is a good reason to take a better look at Rand Paul and his isolationist views.

Ya think?

I don't think isolationist is a fair depiction of Paul's views. I think non-interventionist is more appropriate. If there is a clear and present danger to us or a country we have mutual defense treaties with - I do think we will likely be obligated to act. But, in this case with Russia flexing his muscle... quite frankly - who cares. I am past fighting other people's battles for them. I am sorry for the Ukrainians who don't want to be Russians... but we have our own troubles here at home we are not addressing and I am quite frankly not interested in paying my tax dollars to assist them. I would rather save our tax dollars and use it to kick Putin's ass if it came down to needing to do that because we were threatened. Not piss it away and keep borrowing from China to involve ourselves in someone else's problem.

I think what DOES make Obama look weak though is the "condeming" it but then not doing anything. Don't even say anything if you are not going to involve yourself.

 

[Jen]

I don't think isolationist is a fair depiction of Paul's views. I think non-interventionist is more appropriate. If there is a clear and present danger to us or a country we have mutual defense treaties with - I do think we will likely be obligated to act. But, in this case with Russia flexing his muscle... quite frankly - who cares. I am past fighting other people's battles for them. I am sorry for the Ukrainians who don't want to be Russians... but we have our own troubles here at home we are not addressing and I am quite frankly not interested in paying my tax dollars to assist them. I would rather save our tax dollars and use it to kick Putin's ass if it came down to needing to do that because we were threatened. Not piss it away and keep borrowing from China to involve ourselves in someone else's problem.

I think what DOES make Obama look weak though is the "condeming" it but then not doing anything. Don't even say anything if you are not going to involve yourself.

I do agree with Paul's "non-interventionist" policy belief. Sorry I said it the wrong way. Non-interventionist is, indeed, more appropriate. And I have felt that we should pull back on a lot of our fingers (and money) in other countries for a long time.

I do not want us in the Russia/Ukraine fight. I would love it if Obama looked stronger while staying out of it. But I am relieved and glad he's just staying out of it. I agree that Obama should not put any lines or threats out there that he will not back up. That's what I meant by looking weak.

 

[fairsheet]

I do agree with Paul's "non-interventionist" policy belief. Sorry I said it the wrong way. Non-interventionist is, indeed, more appropriate. And I have felt that we should pull back on a lot of our fingers (and money) in other countries for a long time.

I do not want us in the Russia/Ukraine fight. I would love it if Obama looked stronger while staying out of it. But I am relieved and glad he's just staying out of it. I agree that Obama should not put any lines or threats out there that he will not back up. That's what I meant by looking weak.

I will challenge the both of you to suggest how Obama could look sufficiently strong to you, while simultaneously staying out of it.

 

[connieb]

I will challenge the both of you to suggest how Obama could look sufficiently strong to you, while simultaneously staying out of it.

I don't think he needs to look "strong" at all. What looks weak is weighing in with an condemnation - then having no interest in backing up. I don't think its weak to just say - its not our problem.

connie

 

[fairsheet]

I don't think he needs to look "strong" at all. What looks weak is weighing in with an condemnation - then having no interest in backing up. I don't think its weak to just say - its not our problem.

connie

I'm really not sure that any of you ODS-ers really knows WHAT he should do, that's any different from what he's done. Thus far, he's backed up every threat he's made. Some ODS-ers think he should go bigger with the threats. Some like you, seem to think that he'd appear "not weak" if he said, "It's not our problem". BIG threat, no threat, his head must be spinning.

 

[Jen]

I will challenge the both of you to suggest how Obama could look sufficiently strong to you, while simultaneously staying out of it.

He should just simply refrain from making statements he has no intention of backing up.

 

[Jen]

I'm really not sure that any of you ODS-ers really knows WHAT he should do, that's any different from what he's done. Thus far, he's backed up every threat he's made. Some ODS-ers think he should go bigger with the threats. Some like you, seem to think that he'd appear "not weak" if he said, "It's not our problem". BIG threat, no threat, his head must be spinning.

He has????
Give me some examples because I can't think of one.

 

[fairsheet]

He has????
Give me some examples because I can't think of one.

Think harder. What he's done thus far, has been in all the MSM. But...that still raises the question of what YOU want him to do? Something?.....nothing?....pick one!

 

[connieb]

I'm really not sure that any of you ODS-ers really knows WHAT he should do, that's any different from what he's done. Thus far, he's backed up every threat he's made. Some ODS-ers think he should go bigger with the threats. Some like you, seem to think that he'd appear "not weak" if he said, "It's not our problem". BIG threat, no threat, his head must be spinning.

Oh,you give Obama too much credit when you claim its ODS. I thought GWB was an idiot and an embarrassment, too.

connie

 

[Jen]

Think harder. What he's done thus far, has been in all the MSM. But...that still raises the question of what YOU want him to do? Something?.....nothing?....pick one!

We are talking foreign policy here. Ukraine is the title of the thread.
He has drawn red lines for Iran.........nothing happened when they crossed that line except that another red line was drawn.

He has said that there would be consequences if PUtin did certain things in the Ukraine. No consequences yet that anyone can notice.

And we can expand to some other things closer to home.

Obama said that the IRS thing was outrageous and intolerable and that we would get to the bottom of it. Nope. Nothing has been done yet.

Obama said that those who attacked and killed our diplomat at Behghazi would be found and dealt with. Nope. Nothing.

 

[fairsheet]

We are talking foreign policy here. Ukraine is the title of the thread.
He has drawn red lines for Iran.........nothing happened when they crossed that line except that another red line was drawn.

He has said that there would be consequences if PUtin did certain things in the Ukraine. No consequences yet that anyone can notice.

And we can expand to some other things closer to home.

Obama said that the IRS thing was outrageous and intolerable and that we would get to the bottom of it. Nope. Nothing has been done yet.

Obama said that those who attacked and killed our diplomat at Behghazi would be found and dealt with. Nope. Nothing.

Uh oh....now you've devolved this one into a rote, generic, Obama hate piece....

Oh well...Obama threatened economic sanctions vis a vis Putin and his buds, if they went ahead with their Crimea plans. They did, and Obama did.

Now the simple and/or inummerate seem convinced that those economic and travel sanctions ain't much. Alas, they're oblivious to just how pissant AND precarious Russia's finances are right now. They're also oblivious to the stake Putin and his buddies hold in what remains of that pissant precariousness.

As the ruble continues to plummet towards worthlessness, it's too bad Obama couldn't have applied even stricter sanctions against their ability to trade those rubles for real currency. Unfortunately, considering what that would cost them, the Euros weren't so down with all that.

Nevertheless, Putin and his oligarchs are ANYthing but "true believers". Their gaggle of "golden geese" is shrinking before their very eyes and the last thing they're going to want to see, is for it to go extinct.

 

[fairsheet]

Oh,you give Obama too much credit when you claim its ODS. I thought GWB was an idiot and an embarrassment, too.

connie

Well, ya got me there! But...my question remains. What do you think Obama or any OTHER president, maybe Mitt or McCain should've done differently?

 

[Figjam]

We are talking foreign policy here. Ukraine is the title of the thread.
He has drawn red lines for Iran.........nothing happened when they crossed that line except that another red line was drawn.

He has said that there would be consequences if PUtin did certain things in the Ukraine. No consequences yet that anyone can notice.

And we can expand to some other things closer to home.

Obama said that the IRS thing was outrageous and intolerable and that we would get to the bottom of it. Nope. Nothing has been done yet.

Obama said that those who attacked and killed our diplomat at Behghazi would be found and dealt with. Nope. Nothing.

...no consequences?

...think again - "
While the annexation of Crimea has rocketed President Vladimir V. Putin’s approval rating to more than 80 percent, it has also contributed to a sobering downturn in Russia’s economy, which was in trouble even before the West imposed sanctions. With inflation rising, growth stagnating, the ruble and stock market plunging, and billions in capital fleeing the country for safety, the economy is teetering on the edge of recession, as the country’s minister of economic development acknowledged on Wednesday.

Mr. Putin, who just lavished $50 billion on the Sochi Olympics, also must now absorb the costs of integrating Crimea, which economists and other experts say has its own sickly economy and expensive infrastructure needs. The economic costs have been masked by recent patriotic fervor but could soon haunt the Kremlin, as prices rise, wages stall and consumer confidence erodes.

Even before the Crimean episode, and the resulting imposition of sanctions by the West, Russia’s $2 trillion economy was suffering from stagflation, that toxic mix of stagnant growth and high inflation typically accompanied by a spike in unemployment. In Russia, joblessness remains low, but only because years of population decline have produced a shrunken, inadequate labor force."

...with all the calls here that Obama has tried this or that to create a diversion of attention away from this or that - what we are seeing putin do is exactly that - attempt to divert attention from the abysmal economic conditions that are befalling his Nation...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/w...before-sanctions-hit.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0

 

[IndependentinWis]

We have no dog in that race.
I don't hate that Obama is keeping us out of it even though I don't like our President looking weak.
Maybe this stuff with Russia is a good reason to take a better look at Rand Paul and his isolationist views.

Ya think?

I think a good thing to say about this problem is that there isn't much any president could do except what Obama is trying. Unless that is you want world War III including the use of nukes.

 

[fairsheet]

...no consequences?

...think again - "
While the annexation of Crimea has rocketed President Vladimir V. Putin’s approval rating to more than 80 percent, it has also contributed to a sobering downturn in Russia’s economy, which was in trouble even before the West imposed sanctions. With inflation rising, growth stagnating, the ruble and stock market plunging, and billions in capital fleeing the country for safety, the economy is teetering on the edge of recession, as the country’s minister of economic development acknowledged on Wednesday.

Mr. Putin, who just lavished $50 billion on the Sochi Olympics, also must now absorb the costs of integrating Crimea, which economists and other experts say has its own sickly economy and expensive infrastructure needs. The economic costs have been masked by recent patriotic fervor but could soon haunt the Kremlin, as prices rise, wages stall and consumer confidence erodes.

Even before the Crimean episode, and the resulting imposition of sanctions by the West, Russia’s $2 trillion economy was suffering from stagflation, that toxic mix of stagnant growth and high inflation typically accompanied by a spike in unemployment. In Russia, joblessness remains low, but only because years of population decline have produced a shrunken, inadequate labor force."

...with all the calls here that Obama has tried this or that to create a diversion of attention away from this or that - what we are seeing putin do is exactly that - attempt to divert attention from the abysmal economic conditions that are befalling his Nation...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/w...before-sanctions-hit.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0

He seems to be going with a modern day iteration of "The Southern Strategy", where you divert everyone's attention by fomenting fear/hate of "the other".

 

[connieb]

Well, ya got me there! But...my question remains. What do you think Obama or any OTHER president, maybe Mitt or McCain should've done differently?

I have answered your question not make any public condemnations they had no intention of backing up.

 

[Figjam]

He seems to be going with a modern day iteration of "The Southern Strategy", where you divert everyone's attention by fomenting fear/hate of "the other".

...absolutely - if people were paying attention when all this nonsense started there was a professor of Russian studies on discussing the political firestorm that putin was facing due to the looming economic crisis and his Sochi spending from which his friends profited nicely and oh by the way they will never pay back debacle.

 

[Jen]

I think a good thing to say about this problem is that there isn't much any president could do except what Obama is trying. Unless that is you want world War III including the use of nukes.

I can agree with that.
I am glad we don't have a hawkish President right now.

 

[NightSwimmer]

I don't hate that Obama is keeping us out of it even though I don't like our President looking weak.

I don't hate that you are so open minded about this issue, even though I don't like our Top Poster looking like an insipid, passive-aggressive neurotic.