Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
So, why the fuss if the others do the same? It's your failure (if this really happened), and instead of focusing how to prevent this from repeating, we get this pointing of fingers. Leaders don't blame others for the mistakes.
No such thing as a good tax - Churchill
To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.
I'll say the same thing that I've said for the last 8 years when people defend Obama that way:
If your best defense of Obama is a comparison to George W Bush, then you've proven my point.
“He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”
The question everybody should be asking is had Hillary won, would Obama be frothing at the mouth like this.
Judging by his past reaction to other numerous hacks, I highly doubt it.
Nope, he wouldn't be. If the Russians had hacked the GOP and Trump, then Obama would've been clucking his tongue in admonishment of their poor cyber security.
“He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”
point is -not- "bush sucked too" but just to point out that Putin, and Russia in general, is necessarily more aggressive precisely because one can only do so much against a nuclear power. Putin invaded Georgia in 2008 because he was pretty confident NATO would not respond. in Ukraine, to a point-- up until the US began indicating not-so-subtly that the price the Russians would pay would go up exponentially the further west they went.
Putin Invaded Georgia and NATO didn't respond because it Georgia isn't NATO.
No, Russia shot down an airliner. The considerable Resistance to sanctions by enough European countries, buckled - and that is with Obama, Mekel and Hollande in power. No - what brought about sanctions reluctantly was the absurd situation that France was in the process of selling amphibious assualt ships beforehand (and continued the process) until it became politically untenable and diplomatic pressure from the Dutch to avenge the murdered especially with French military gear showing up in Russian Tanks the French sold to Moscow became too much. Bluntly - things will work for Russia if Europe trades with it.
There isn't one geopolitical foe of the Obama administration that believes the price they will pay will exceed the 'norms' it breaks. This one won't either. Heck if you guys wanted to stick it to the Russians, increase funding to the Ukraine. But that won't happen. That would actually be realpolitik.
If your best defense of Obama is a comparison to George W Bush, then you've proven my point.
the very next line states that is not my point. the diffuse nature of cyber operations along with the lack of real options to properly inflict proportionate costs on Russia means that Russia has a high incentive to continue these type of operations no matter whom is President. and that was one of the findings in the intelligence report.
this would be true even if the next President was the reincarnation of Reagan. remember, the Soviets tested Reagan repeatedly as well.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Heck if you guys wanted to stick it to the Russians, increase funding to the Ukraine. But that won't happen. That would actually be realpolitik.
not really?
what costs would doing that impose on Russia? it's no longer Russian boys doing the dying out there; it's their puppets whom they could give a crap about.
and if push comes to shove, it so happens that Russia has demonstrated that they are willing to put tank divisions in the Ukraine. NATO is not. there is an asymmetrical balance in terms of willingness to use force.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
point is -not- "bush sucked too" but just to point out that Putin, and Russia in general, is necessarily more aggressive precisely because one can only do so much against a nuclear power. Putin invaded Georgia in 2008 because he was pretty confident NATO would not respond. in Ukraine, to a point-- up until the US began indicating not-so-subtly that the price the Russians would pay would go up exponentially the further west they went.
we'll need to do the same here. Obama has stated that Russia will pay a proportional price, and a start has been made; but unfortunately given the timing it will be up to the next President to continue making Russia pay such a price. I do not see that happening.
which means the next time I hear a conservative use the term 'useful idiot' there will be a glaring example right there.
obama did state lots of things wrt national security, none of it make any sense. "red line" 'jv team" duhhh?
uh are you making an argument about what i stated or are you just vomiting a few words you heard on fox?
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
i honestly have no clue what you're trying to get at.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Comment