Obama Aligns Foreign Policy with GOP

inmytree

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

How else is someone supposed to take likening your foreign policy to Reagan and Bush? Tell me how you think their foreign policy was anything to aspire to?

This doesn't answer my question/point about your pointing to my need to read chomsky...are you ok with focusing on half-quotes...? What would Norm do...?;)

anyway, I'm guessing Obama doesn't aspire to repeat the Iran/Contra scandal, nor is he looking to fund fighters in Nicaragua...who knows, I could be wrong...I'm guessing he is looking at this:

By the end of his second term, Reagan's hard-line foreign policy had produced significant results. His summit meetings with reform-minded Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev yielded the first treaties in history reducing the nuclear arsenals of both nations. Such breakthroughs did not come without stumbling blocks, however. Gorbachev was eager to salvage the Soviet economy by ending the arms race, but was fearful of U.S. development of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). SDI was Reagan's pet project. As he envisioned it, SDI would allow the construction of a "peace shield" that would protect the U.S. from incoming nuclear missiles. Though derided by some in the U.S. as a "star wars" fantasy, SDI was taken seriously by the Soviets. Reagan held tough in insisting that its development continue. Eventually, Gorbachev relented. By the time Reagan visited Moscow -- the capital of what he once called "an evil empire" -- late in 1988, the Cold War was coming to an end.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/40_reagan/reagan_foreign.html

however, I'm unsure if Obama's stance on star wars....

polaris

what's there to like about reagan's foreign policy?? ... between playing both sides of the fence in iran/iraq and latin american intervention - it's more of the same old ... us economic and imperialistic gains ...

it's been the same for every president since the guy who called the hit on mossadegh ...

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

i think i like Obama a little after reading the topic post. good for him.

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

This doesn't answer my question/point about your pointing to my need to read chomsky...are you ok with focusing on half-quotes...? What would Norm do...?;)

anyway, I'm guessing Obama doesn't aspire to repeat the Iran/Contra scandal, nor is he looking to fund fighters in Nicaragua...who knows, I could be wrong...I'm guessing he is looking at this:

By the end of his second term, Reagan's hard-line foreign policy had produced significant results. His summit meetings with reform-minded Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev yielded the first treaties in history reducing the nuclear arsenals of both nations. Such breakthroughs did not come without stumbling blocks, however. Gorbachev was eager to salvage the Soviet economy by ending the arms race, but was fearful of U.S. development of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). SDI was Reagan's pet project. As he envisioned it, SDI would allow the construction of a "peace shield" that would protect the U.S. from incoming nuclear missiles. Though derided by some in the U.S. as a "star wars" fantasy, SDI was taken seriously by the Soviets. Reagan held tough in insisting that its development continue. Eventually, Gorbachev relented. By the time Reagan visited Moscow -- the capital of what he once called "an evil empire" -- late in 1988, the Cold War was coming to an end.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/40_reagan/reagan_foreign.html

however, I'm unsure if Obama's stance on star wars....

The Cold War was bullshit politicing.

Knowing what Noam knows about Reagan's foreign policy and the extent to which he has written about it...he'd probably be a bit concerned about those words coming out of Obama's mouth just like the many of us. Do you think the blogger purposefully didn't read or bother with the rest of the quote or did he focus on the part that concerned him? And yes, those words are very concerning to me having read about Reagan and the absolute murderous ways his admin conducted business in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/7/noam_chomsky_on_reagans_legacy_bush

Abookamongstthemany

polaris wrote:

what's there to like about reagan's foreign policy?? ... between playing both sides of the fence in iran/iraq and latin american intervention - it's more of the same old ... us economic and imperialistic gains ...

it's been the same for every president since the guy who called the hit on mossadegh ...

I know! That's why this quote is so concerning...esp given a candidate who many view as soooo liberal and peace loving.

polaris

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I know! That's why this quote is so concerning...esp given a candidate who many view as soooo liberal and peace loving.

i can see how this is tough for americans ... first - it's always hard to accept that the gov't acts in ways that are unbecoming and secondly - they've just gone thru 8 years of the worst president of all time ...

americans are desperate for change - desperate for someone to be worthy of what they consider to be the privilege of leading the country ... unfortunately, it will never happen within this current structure (two party) - so, your choices are either depression or rationalization ...

inmytree

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

The Cold War was bullshit politicing.

Knowing what Noam knows about Reagan's foreign policy and the extent to which he has written about it...he'd probably be a bit concerned about those words coming out of Obama's mouth just like the many of us. Do you think the blogger purposefully didn't read or bother with the rest of the quote or did he focus on the part that concerned him?

purposely....

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

And yes, those words are very concerning to me having read about Reagan and the absolute murderous ways his admin conducted business in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/7/noam_chomsky_on_reagans_legacy_bush

ok...point taken...

Abookamongstthemany

polaris wrote:

i can see how this is tough for americans ... first - it's always hard to accept that the gov't acts in ways that are unbecoming and secondly - they've just gone thru 8 years of the worst president of all time ...

americans are desperate for change - desperate for someone to be worthy of what they consider to be the privilege of leading the country ... unfortunately, it will never happen within this current structure (two party) - so, your choices are either depression or rationalization ...

Well I'm not playing along in this rigged game. I couldn't do it with a clear conscience. I gotta keep doing all I can to rail against this system because it's not working for us and the rest of the world....only the small % of people we know as the wealthy/powerful benefit from this sorry excuse for a gov't.

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

purposefully....



ok...point taken...

So do you think I'm purposefully taking concern with it out of context, as well?

My concern stems from what I know. I'm guessing that's probably the same deal for most who have a problem with that quote. We don't need to make up false reasons to not like Obama's record, history and own words....it's all right there.

inmytree

polaris wrote:

i can see how this is tough for americans ... first - it's always hard to accept that the gov't acts in ways that are unbecoming and secondly - they've just gone thru 8 years of the worst president of all time ...

americans are desperate for change - desperate for someone to be worthy of what they consider to be the privilege of leading the country ... unfortunately, it will never happen within this current structure (two party) - so, your choices are either depression or rationalization ...

perhaps...

I guess I'm looking at in a different light...in no way do I think Obama is a perfect person...there is no such person...

however, it's the system we have...sure, go vote third party...that's everyone's right...and I support that right...I would hope that those who disagree with the two-party system would respect my choice to vote for someone in that system...

inmytree

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

So do you think I'm purposefully taking concern with it out of context, as well?

I don't...I did say your point was taken..I do think the original blogger did misquote on purpose....for effect...

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

My concern stems from what I know. I'm guessing that's probably the same deal for most who have a problem with that quote. We don't need to make up false reasons to not like Obama's record, history and own words....it's all right there.

and that's cool with me...

as I see it, Obama is looking more at the diplomacy displayed by those mentioned...but that's just me...

for me, I'd like someone who can reach out to others...I don't think that's a bad thing...

polaris

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Well I'm not playing along in this rigged game. I couldn't do it with a clear conscience. I gotta keep doing all I can to rail against this system because it's not working for us and the rest of the world....only the small % of people we know as the wealthy/powerful benefit from this sorry excuse for a gov't.

what i don't understand as it pertains to this quote of obama's is ... the guys that were around with reagan are around with bush ... guys like rumsfield, wolfowitz, etc ... its the same guys ...

Abookamongstthemany

polaris wrote:

what i don't understand as it pertains to this quote of obama's is ... the guys that were around with reagan are around with bush ... guys like rumsfield, wolfowitz, etc ... its the same guys ...

Yeah, it's seems like to me there is an effort to make it seem like the same exact people and policy haven't been running the show this whole time. You know, like we the people actually have a say and our votes change things.

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

I don't...I did say your point was taken..I do think the original blogger did misquote on purpose....for effect...



and that's cool with me...

as I see it, Obama is looking more at the diplomacy displayed by those mentioned...but that's just me...

for me, I'd like someone who can reach out to others...I don't think that's a bad thing...

I think the bogger is focusing on this point of concern just like I am


Coming from Reagan and Bush foreign policy...I hope he doesn't plan on reaching out in the way they did...which included overthrowing those country's democratically elected gov't and installing ruthless dictators and funding them to oppress their people and keep them in line with death squads.

polaris

inmytree wrote:

perhaps...

I guess I'm looking at in a different light...in no way do I think Obama is a perfect person...there is no such person...

however, it's the system we have...sure, go vote third party...that's everyone's right...and I support that right...I would hope that those who disagree with the two-party system would respect my choice to vote for someone in that system...

sure ... i can definitely respect the lesser of two evils approach - as change is often symbolic anyways ...

unfortunately real change starts within and that is the hardest change to make ...

inmytree

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I think the bogger is focusing on this point of concern just like I am

I guess we'll agree to disagree...

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Coming from Reagan and Bush foreign policy...I hope he doesn't plan on reaching out in the way they did...which included overthrowing those country's democratically elected gov't and installing ruthless dictators and funding them to oppress their people and keep them in line with death squads.

do you seriously believe Obama is advocating death squads and will seek to overthrow democratic gov'ts....?

polaris

inmytree wrote:

do you seriously believe Obama is advocating death squads and will seek to overthrow democratic gov'ts....?

this is the thing ... no president ever advocates death squads ... they just get approved by them ...

inmytree

polaris wrote:

this is the thing ... no president ever advocates death squads ... they just get approved by them ...

well, I guess that could be said for any one currently running for office, be it Obama, Clinton, McCain, Nader, and so on...

sadly, I've not yet attained the ability to predict the future...:)

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

perhaps...

I guess I'm looking at in a different light...in no way do I think Obama is a perfect person...there is no such person...

however, it's the system we have...sure, go vote third party...that's everyone's right...and I support that right...I would hope that those who disagree with the two-party system would respect my choice to vote for someone in that system...

No one said they didn't respect your right to make your own decisions. We just point out problems we have with the guy that just so happens to be your choice and then you defend him and we get into these discussions. Saying that I disrespect your choice would have to also say you disrespect my not choicing your choice. I don't think that's the case either way...we're just on here discussing our disagreements.

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

well, I guess that could be said for any one currently running for office, be it Obama, Clinton, McCain, Nader, and so on...

sadly, I've not yet attained the ability to predict the future...:)

But when Obama praises the foreign policy of someone who did approve of and fund death squads then it does point to the future.