Westside Steve Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Would you expect Obama to declare war on a country, or to build a case(Iraq war style) to going to war with a country we currently are at peace with? I hope that is a better description. Well that would certainly depend on the circumstances. I'm not trying to dodge the question but that should be pretty obvious. But I'm not against a first strike strategy if it seems necessary. I'd say that Iran developing a nuclear bomb would push the envelope, wouldn't you? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 But I was talking about the Kurds. THe muja*deen were not Kurds. The Kurds are but a very small minority in Afghanistan. And yes, Cleve, I graduated from HS just fine with my class, and graduated from college. I just don't brag about it ad nauseum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 But I was talking about the Kurds. THe muja*deen were not Kurds. The Kurds are but a very small minority in Afghanistan. And yes, Cleve, I graduated from HS just fine with my class, and graduated from college. I just don't brag about it ad nauseum. I am pretty sure he was referring that the only time it worked(arming the local nationals) was the mujahideen that would become al-qaeda. Arming the Kurds is not really cut and dry, large groups of Kurds are labeled as Terrorist organizations by allies in the region(Turkey). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Well that would certainly depend on the circumstances. I'm not trying to dodge the question but that should be pretty obvious. But I'm not against a first strike strategy if it seems necessary. I'd say that Iran developing a nuclear bomb would push the envelope, wouldn't you? WSS But at this point(6+yrs into his presidency) do you think he would likely declare war on a country or make a case to go to war? Things can always change tomorrow, and a first strike might be needed, like your example, but sitting here today what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 So just to clarify - he's a cowardly wuss that won't do what needs to be done, but at the same time he's a war-mongerer? Got it.I think OBF had an accurate take on this matter in bringing up Libya/Qaddafi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 I am pretty sure he was referring that the only time it worked(arming the local nationals) was the mujahideen that would become al-qaeda. Arming the Kurds is not really cut and dry, large groups of Kurds are labeled as Terrorist organizations by allies in the region(Turkey). aha, now we get to the bottom of it. Arming the kurds would piss off Turkey and push them further towards muslimhood. Issue solved, nothing to do with Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 But at this point(6+yrs into his presidency) do you think he would likely declare war on a country or make a case to go to war? Things can always change tomorrow, and a first strike might be needed, like your example, but sitting here today what do you think? Maybe I'm not getting the exact point of the question but no as things sit I don't imagine him going to the podium to make a case for war or taking steps in that direction. I also think that attitude has not been good in situations especially including Libya. As with any dictator there are other scumbags who want to take over his spot and whoever wins will favor the countries that helped. Kadafi was afraid of the United States and apparently playing ball despite his downside. The United States decided to play the rat and slightly favor his opposition. Not enough to gain their favor, but enough to piss off the scumbags and supported him. So it was a lose lose. Do you disagree?I do not believe that sucking the ayatollahs dick will gain anything positive. ( and I don't disagree with those who say that most military involvement have no good way to go so if he picks a bad one it's hard to completely blame him, but I repeat if he wants to brag about his military victories then...) WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Maybe I'm not getting the exact point of the question but no as things sit I don't imagine him going to the podium to make a case for war or taking steps in that direction. I also think that attitude has not been good in situations especially including Libya. As with any dictator there are other scumbags who want to take over his spot and whoever wins will favor the countries that helped. Kadafi was afraid of the United States and apparently playing ball despite his downside. The United States decided to play the rat and slightly favor his opposition. Not enough to gain their favor, but enough to piss off the scumbags and supported him. So it was a lose lose. Do you disagree? I do not believe that sucking the ayatollahs dick will gain anything positive. ( and I don't disagree with those who say that most military involvement have no good way to go so if he picks a bad one it's hard to completely blame him, but I repeat if he wants to brag about his military victories then...) WSS Roughly agree, generally in foreign policy Obama has been really on the Passive\Diplomacy side(some argue this as good some as bad), so its hard to label him as a warmonger, which is my argument. The US under Obama has made attempts(whether rightly or wrongly) to gain influence in areas, encourage dissent, or even provide military level aid that has lead to some conflicts, but this has been almost standard practice for US presidents since WW2 ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 And I pretty much agree with you. Remember I said he can be referred to as both, meaning that the escalation of the completely useless Afghanistan operation would make him a warmonger as well as and ineffectual puss in other situations. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 He has not started a war(Iraq Invasion) had a war start during his presidency(War on Terror\Afghanistan) and "threaten" 2 other countries by calling them Axis of Evil(Iran and North Korea). Obama has not handled the wars in Iraq\Afghanistan well and it seems Russia is posturing for a confrontation , but he has not been anywhere near as aggressive as Bush was in foreign affairs. He started a war in Lybia to overthrough Quadaffi (sp) you can gussy it up in other terms, but what he and Hillary Clinton did were acts of War. (and impeachable offenses, but that's another story) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 It was absolutely a form of "warfare"..no gussying anything up. It was just done in a way that didn't cost us hundreds of billions. In the end it was the same result though huh? A vacuum created where fuck if we know what's gonna fill it...sounds very familiar. A wise man once said, on TV about 2 weeks, "learning curves are for pussies"......in reference to the middle east. And he's right, our learning curve is a straight line. At least it didn't cost us "relatively" speaking. He started a war in Lybia to overthrough Quadaffi (sp) you can gussy it up in other terms, but what he and Hillary Clinton did were acts of War. (and impeachable offenses, but that's another story) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 the folks that died at Benghazi would have said it cost us something. And once again, in the Middle East the US acted rashly and picked the wrong group of thugs to get behind. It's not all on Obama or Hillary, Insane McCain and Lipstick Lyndsey Graham had their dirty little paws in this, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.