Do we need a Liberal Administration right now?

China-Russia vs. America (Europe will be tired as hell of our shenanigans by then and will delightfully sit this one out).

Betting money is not on us.
 
Dixie said:
And we have a half dozen posts from Mott to reinforce the Liberal mantra of "Do Nothing--Blame Bush!" which appears to be pretty much the extent of any US foreign policy under an Obama Administration. Thanks for concurring with the rest of the pinheads, and confirming my point.
Click to expand...

Why do you hate America Dixie?
 
One reason I don't want McCain to win, is that I don't want to die. McCain will set us straight on the path to war, and it's fine for 60 year old Dixie to send WM to die for him, but others have qualms with that.
 
Well if a boycott of Russia is that easy then Bush should be able to pull it off before he leaves office. And what OTHER countries will follow suit with us Dixie? Will Europe? Very doubtful, China? Not a chance in hell. Russia in their major partner in the SCO. China has thumbed their noses at us on Darfur and on their citizens civil liberties and human rights. If we attempt a boycott of Russia we will do it alone.
 
What floors me Dixie is that you can't see that the last 7 years of a Bush administration has made this move by Russia, now at this later hour, into Georgia proper and not just taking back South Ossetia and Abkhazia, possible. The US has no standing in the world right at this moment to force the world to do ANYTHING. The UN Security counsel will not be able to do anything because the Russian's major partner in the SCO is China and they have VETO power as does Russia. This is what happens when you tell the world that you are going to go it alone and to hell with what they think. They tell you to go to ahead and do it alone. All of it.
 
Socrtease said:
What floors me Dixie is that you can't see that the last 7 years of a Bush administration has made this move by Russia, now at this later hour, into Georgia proper and not just taking back South Ossetia and Abkhazia, possible. The US has no standing in the world right at this moment to force the world to do ANYTHING. The UN Security counsel will not be able to do anything because the Russian's major partner in the SCO is China and they have VETO power as does Russia. This is what happens when you tell the world that you are going to go it alone and to hell with what they think. They tell you to go to ahead and do it alone. All of it.
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen... witness an example of what we can expect to hear for the next 4 years, if Obama wins the presidency. America can't do this... can't do that... we are powerless and impotent, thanks to the 'failed policies' of George W. Bush! It doesn't matter who invades whom, or what happens to Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world, because this excuse will be universal and never ending. If the Iron Curtain goes back up... welp, just those 'failed policies' of Bush again, nothing much Obama can do about it.

More shrugs of indifference, and inaction, while focusing on the previous administration's 'failures' and blaming them (or America) for the problems. This will be the order of the day in heaping double-helpings, because the Libs are clearly not ready to lead.
 
If any of the posters in this discussion have studied their history (or read this http://www.newsmax.com/morris/russia_invades_georgia/2008/08/11/120902.html) then they'd recognize that the Russians are doing exactly what Hitler's Nazi Germany did when they invaded Czechoslovakia. So far, the USA, Great Britain and France aren't doing anything to 'effectively' stop Russia just as they didn't do anything to stop Hitler in 1938.

If Obama and the Democrats win in November history will surely repeat itself, and he will be remembered as a worse leader than Neville Chamberlain (a wussy of a man who was probably addicted to porn, doobies, and blow jobs too) and whose stubborn denial of the facts and lack of personal fortitude and courage to confront the growing Nazi threat only enabled Hitler's tanks to blitz across most of Europe without serious opposition.

How free were the folks in Sudetenland and the rest of Europe under Nazi rule?

How free were the peoples of Eastern Europe after FDR (a liberal Democrat btw) sacrificed freedom for the hope of stability and ceded the region to Stalin's control, in one of the biggest mistakes ever made by a US President?

How free are the people of Georgia (one of the most pro-democratic, pro-Western former Soviet Republics) whose cities in and around South Ossetia are being bombed and attacked by invading Russian troops? How free are the 30,000+ that have fled their homes already while Western countries are increasing their diplomatic efforts to end the fighting?

Ironically but not surprising is that fighting is getting worse as diplomatic efforts are increasing. The USA is not alone in opposing the Russian aggression, the EC, the Group of Seven and other nations have all called for the Russians to stop the aggression. Yet fighting in Georgia is spreading as Russian forces continue to expand their operations and occupation even into Western Georgia and Russian officials are ignoring pleas for a cease fire from Georgia.

In 2005, kicked off his trip to Russia to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the end of WWII, by stopping in neighboring Latvia (which had been dominated and brutalized by the Soviets) and denounced the 1945 Yalta agreement in which FDR made arguably the worst move of any US President in history by handing Eastern Europe over to the Soviets. By clearly and forcefully repudiating America's complicity in the agreement by an American president he also Vladimir Putin a stern warning to be careful how he handles the fledgling democracies surrounding Russia's borders.

President Bush said, "We will not repeat the mistakes of other generations, appeasing or excusing tyranny, and sacrificing freedom in the vain pursuit of stability. . . we have learned our lesson; no one's liberty is expendable. In the long run, our security and true stability depend on the freedom of others."

However Putin's Russia has been growing increasingly authoritarian ever since. Today it looks as though he is calling Bush's warning a bluff and is thumbing his nose directly at the USA and the EC through his proxy President Dmitry Medvedev and the direct expansion of military actions well outside of the disputed territory of South Ossetia into Georgia. Georgia is one of the former Soviet Republics that has sought to distance itself from Russia and align itself more with the West. It is an independent democratic Republic and it's borders and it's national sovereignty have been blatantly and inexcusably violated by the assault and occupation of Putin's Russian troops.

Do we really need any more liberals in Washington now?
 
Last edited:
Dixie you alabama drop out.
the american people would be tickled pink if Obama told us for the next 4 yrs "WE CAN'T INVADE ANYBODY'.
 
Dixie said:
Ladies and gentlemen... witness an example of what we can expect to hear for the next 4 years, if Obama wins the presidency. America can't do this... can't do that... we are powerless and impotent, thanks to the 'failed policies' of George W. Bush! It doesn't matter who invades whom, or what happens to Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world, because this excuse will be universal and never ending. If the Iron Curtain goes back up... welp, just those 'failed policies' of Bush again, nothing much Obama can do about it.

More shrugs of indifference, and inaction, while focusing on the previous administration's 'failures' and blaming them (or America) for the problems. This will be the order of the day in heaping double-helpings, because the Libs are clearly not ready to lead.
Click to expand...

We don't speak for Obama. It's inane for you to suggest that we do.

All we are saying is that we KNOW what 7+ years of a GOP admin has wrought, making the whole premise of this thread kind of backwards. Yes, we will blame Bush, and continue blaming Bush for everything he is accountable for, as it should be. That doesn't mean that Obama has no agenda, because he does, and he will handle whatever foreign policy crises that come up with a level of competence & creativity that hopefully will be a strong departure from the Keystone Kops routine we have seen in this admin.
 
Dixie said:
Ladies and gentlemen... witness an example of what we can expect to hear for the next 4 years, if Obama wins the presidency. America can't do this... can't do that... we are powerless and impotent, thanks to the 'failed policies' of George W. Bush! It doesn't matter who invades whom, or what happens to Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world, because this excuse will be universal and never ending. If the Iron Curtain goes back up... welp, just those 'failed policies' of Bush again, nothing much Obama can do about it.

More shrugs of indifference, and inaction, while focusing on the previous administration's 'failures' and blaming them (or America) for the problems. This will be the order of the day in heaping double-helpings, because the Libs are clearly not ready to lead.
Click to expand...
Interesting that you chose to address this one rather than my first. What is the CURRENT President going to do other than mouth words at the Russians? If all this is just as simple as you put it then why aren't you demanding the current president do what you suggest? Because you refuse to see that Bush, like a drunk uncle, has taken our car out, driven drunk, blown the engine, brought the car back to you and is now pissed cause you can't take him to the quicky mart to get him a pack of cigarettes. I am saying that right this very moment, while Bush still holds the office he has no political currency on the world stage to do anything. Why do you keep talking about what Obama is going to do when he is not president yet. Bush is, it is his job until January 09 and this mess came on his watch. It is his to deal with.
 
Socrtease said:
Interesting that you chose to address this one rather than my first. What is the CURRENT President going to do other than mouth words at the Russians? If all this is just as simple as you put it then why aren't you demanding the current president do what you suggest? Because you refuse to see that Bush, like a drunk uncle, has taken our car out, driven drunk, blown the engine, brought the car back to you and is now pissed cause you can't take him to the quicky mart to get him a pack of cigarettes. I am saying that right this very moment, while Bush still holds the office he has no political currency on the world stage to do anything. Why do you keep talking about what Obama is going to do when he is not president yet. Bush is, it is his job until January 09 and this mess came on his watch. It is his to deal with.
Click to expand...

He ain't going to do shit. First of all, what he did in Iraq is too similar, so who is he, or we, to talk? Secondly, we are broke and so is our military. The only people afraid of us are Canadians, because we could move there enmass and bring down property values.

McCain on the other hand is going to stand in front of a podium with flags, pretending that he is already president - which is apparently not presumptious when white people do it - and go "hardline" on the Soviets...er, Russians. Begging the question: Are Americans dying for the chance to return to the days of nuclear holocaust as a real possibility they had to live with?

I'm betting no. McCain and Dix are betting yes. Let's see.
 
We don't speak for Obama. It's inane for you to suggest that we do.
Click to expand...

It certainly seems like you think WE speak for Bush! Yes, I do believe a politician's core constituency has a lot to do with what he says, so in a matter of speaking, you certainly do speak for Obama. There is nothing 'inane' about that.
 
Socrtease said:
Interesting that you chose to address this one rather than my first. What is the CURRENT President going to do other than mouth words at the Russians? If all this is just as simple as you put it then why aren't you demanding the current president do what you suggest? Because you refuse to see that Bush, like a drunk uncle, has taken our car out, driven drunk, blown the engine, brought the car back to you and is now pissed cause you can't take him to the quicky mart to get him a pack of cigarettes. I am saying that right this very moment, while Bush still holds the office he has no political currency on the world stage to do anything. Why do you keep talking about what Obama is going to do when he is not president yet. Bush is, it is his job until January 09 and this mess came on his watch. It is his to deal with.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't matter which post I chose, all I see is a bunch of bitter ranting about Bush, and how everything is his fault, happened on his watch, and not Obama's responsibility. This is exactly what we will hear for the next 4 years, if Obama wins. I just want America to get a good dose of it now, and understand what an Obama Administration will be like. Instead of solutions to problems and resolution of crisis, we will have more of what we've had the past 7+ years, bashing and blaming Bush for everything, while offering no viable alternative. Anything that comes up, will be cast in the light of... 'well, if Bush hadn't done this... or Bush hadn't done that...maybe Obama could do something...' This is the "leadership" everyone is apparently ga-ga over, and contemplating for our future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top