myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Benghazi, Libya and the Arab Spring--what have we learned?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16208
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chided on his lack of attribution, mrgybe gives citations--but fails to abandon hysteria. Panetta's comments are troubling in one way--he is a loyal guy, and expresses his concerns rather than keep his silence. Since he has no ambition for higher elective office, his disappointment with Obama is clear, and he eventually resigned. This may well be a valid criticism of Obama's decision making style or interpersonal skills with his staff. Coming from someone like Panetta, and not a hysteric like some of the righties here, it raises concerns for me.

Beyond that, mrgybe and the right are playing a political game that we can call "if only." The military has always been suspicious of a commander in chief that has not served in the military, and their snipes against presidents have only become steadily bolder since the elimination of the draft. The military is dominated by people with a rather typical conservative viewpoint, that is, people must be controlled by force. A viewpoint with merit, but not the only valid viewpoint.

Here Panetta makes a good point--without direct intervention by Obama there was no chance of convincing Maliki to try to push through a status of forces agreement. Obama played this the same way he played it in Afghanistan, and he was successful in Afghanistan--after waiting the outgoing head of state out. The game here is the assumption that Obama's intervention would have rolled both Maliki and the parliament. Of course, this is exactly the argument that Panetta and Clinton lost. The presidents make the final decisions--and this one might be wrong--those who lose write books. Missing from Panetta's comments, and a point on which mrgybe again stonewalls his critics, is any analysis of how Maliki might collect the necessary votes, and what the time frame might be, to push a status of forces agreement through. Mrgybe's contempt for legal niceties in the oil empire couldn't be clearer.

Finally, after rendering a more sober opinion with a far more credible source than himself, mrgybe again shows himself to be a nasty little piece of work. He proceeds from what may be a mistake by Obama to describe this as the inevitable result when you elect someone with inexperience, and to excoriate all those on the left as similarly out of touch with the real world. The same could be said about those who simply assume, without consideration, that bribery and threats would have resulted in the necessary status of force agreement. Out of touch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
uwindsurf



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 968
Location: Classified

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
We have also learned, from their comments, that most contributors to this forum have little idea how the world works outside their small bubble.


Are you the great and powerful Oz?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3598

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gybe absolutely discredits every statement made by Obamas people and would be trashing Panettas book too.
Instead Gybe found a passage that vaguely agrees with him, so one of Bamas people is a genius.
Until he disagrees with Gybe, then Panetta turns into a hack again.
Life in Gybes bubble leaves him with a very little info about the real world.
Just read his posts, he is wrong so often that even a glimmer of agreement from Obamas people is an amazing experience in there in the darkness.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10030

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to guess that if we chose the path continuing war and aggression in Iraq somehow the problems rift in the Middle East simply wouldn't exist, as if there wouldn't be any consequence for our actions. Is that the message mrgybe?

"I do think that if we had had a presence there, it might not have created the kind of vacuum that we saw develop in Iraq." In his statement, Panetta is sort of betting against the odds isn't he? What would have happened if we never left? The simple view from the hawks' perspective is that nothing serious would have resulted because we would have snuffed it out with our power and superiority. That kind of thought reeks of ignorance and a lack of reality, and it doesn't acknowledge any unexpected downsides to our actions.

If we think back 10-11 years, we saw an inexperienced headstrong Bush Administration stupidly rush into Iraq militarily and literally destroy the government and military with no clue what would happen as a result of our actions. Do the resulting years of conflict and strife show how victorious and smart we were? Why is it that some folks just don't get it. It's not about going in and kicking some ass like we control the world.


Last edited by swchandler on Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
uwindsurf



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 968
Location: Classified

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
It's not about going in and kicking some ass like we control the world.


Apparently you don't know my friend nw30. This is exactly his position.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16208
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And the ass-kicked Iraq generals formed ISIS. How's that working out for the neo-cons now? What is the current solution? Don't look at that man behind the curtains, or the money we make on a new fighter jet. More of the same.

It coulda been better. Maybe. Panetta thinks it might have. Boy is that a powerful argument. Twelve years and over a hundred thousand troops wasn't enough, but 10,000 troops and ?? years more, or maybe 20,000 troops would have been enough?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6480
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

youwindsurf wrote:
swchandler wrote:
It's not about going in and kicking some ass like we control the world.


Apparently you don't know my friend nw30. This is exactly his position.

Bullshit!
My position is that of believing in the war on terror and nothing else.
As Panetta has said, "it's a war that could go on for 30 years".
Either you support the war on terror, or you don't.

It's pretty basic stuff, don't hurt yourself in trying to misrepresent what I've been saying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
uwindsurf



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 968
Location: Classified

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
youwindsurf wrote:
swchandler wrote:
It's not about going in and kicking some ass like we control the world.


Apparently you don't know my friend nw30. This is exactly his position.

Bullshit!
My position is that of believing in the war on terror and nothing else .
As Panetta has said, "it's a war that could go on for 30 years".
Either you support the war on terror, or you don't.

It's pretty basic stuff, don't hurt yourself in trying to misrepresent what I've been saying.


Here is your statement:

"BHO didn't even try to use the power of persuasion that this country has to offer, we are in fact the most powerful nation in the world, which is one of BHO's problems, he doesn't like that, being the globalist that he is. He doesn't believe that the world is a safe place, as long as the USA is the strongest nation."

What is this "power of persuasion" that the US has, if not kicking ass? I asked you to elaborate but you refused.

Are you dressing as Captain America for Halloween this year?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6480
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

youwindsurf wrote:
nw30 wrote:
youwindsurf wrote:
swchandler wrote:
It's not about going in and kicking some ass like we control the world.


Apparently you don't know my friend nw30. This is exactly his position.

Bullshit!
My position is that of believing in the war on terror and nothing else .
As Panetta has said, "it's a war that could go on for 30 years".
Either you support the war on terror, or you don't.

It's pretty basic stuff, don't hurt yourself in trying to misrepresent what I've been saying.


Here is your statement:

"BHO didn't even try to use the power of persuasion that this country has to offer, we are in fact the most powerful nation in the world, which is one of BHO's problems, he doesn't like that, being the globalist that he is. He doesn't believe that the world is a safe place, as long as the USA is the strongest nation."

What is this "power of persuasion" that the US has, if not kicking ass? I asked you to elaborate but you refused.

Are you dressing as Captain America for Halloween this year?

Yep, that is what I said, and I take nothing back, I used the word "persuasion", not 'do it my way or I'll kick your ass', you came up with that limited logic.
Power also refers to influence, influencing not only Iraq, but all the other countries and tribes that deals with Iraq as well.

I was going to dress up as a mean girl, but I didn't want to be called a pussy, then I was going to dress up as an Ebola patient, but I didn't want to be call insensitive, then I was going to dress up as Al Sharpton, but I didn't want to be call a racist. So now I'm thinking about dressing as a republican, I'll wear a sign that says "I'm a rich, gun loving, racist, bigoted, hateful homophobe" over a vest that the traders wear on the floor of the NY Stock Exchange, dress pants, and combat boots, with a tie of course, and a cowboy hat. My wife will be wearing a dog collar with a leash that I will be holding as she walks behind me.
I bet I'll win the costume competition, I live in a very liberal town.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16208
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's supposed to be a costume, not your everyday clothes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 11 of 13

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group