Thread: Pres. Obama, between a rock and a hard place.

Little as in stature or years?

Regardless who the administration in charge is, the primary goal should be the American People.
Trough out the years, the US has been involved in different wars, and yes, wars have been good for the economy, but normally after the war ends come unemployment, etc.
I'm the father of two former Marines, one of them a survivor on the World Trade Center attack building 2 floor 23, and I know what those boys go through, and it's not fair that they're been killed or crippled in foreign wars while our politicians are getting richer and richer.
On the other hand, I have my differences with the current administration, but I guess that's normal

Originally Posted by Del1r1um

If you are talking about elected officials, i agree for the most part. If you mean conservatives I can not say the same.

I was referring to the first sentence of the link that was up for discussion

Originally Posted by FOXNews

President Obama is sticking with his call for a restrained U.S. response to Iran's post-election protests as pressure mounts from the GOP for him to "lead" by declaring his support for the country's pro-reform demonstrations.

Originally Posted by Navaja

Regardless who the administration in charge is, the primary goal should be the American People.
Trough out the years, the US has been involved in different wars, and yes, wars have been good for the economy, but normally after the war ends come unemployment, etc.
I'm the father of two former Marines, one of them a survivor on the World Trade Center attack building 2 floor 23, and I know what those boys go through, and it's not fair that they're been killed or crippled in foreign wars while our politicians are getting richer and richer.
On the other hand, I have my differences with the current administration, but I guess that's normal

Still one in. Son. 101. Feel ya.

Originally Posted by gugi

I was referring to the first sentence of the link that was up for discussion

GOP or Republican is not the same as Conservative gugi but I understand that many think the terms interchangeable.

Originally Posted by JMS

I am making no such suggestion. Read the quoted post below as I think you must have missed it.

I didn't miss it, but I only wanted to flame you for one post at a time. And no, I didn't think you would make such a suggestion, I was just pointing out that it's a slippery slope to equate government oppression of an opposition party with seeing woman in distress.

Originally Posted by JMS

What I am saying pio is that if we as a nation use the above thinking to not involve ourselves into problems around the world then we as a nation are lower than worms!
We should do what we do based on what is right and best for all involved, not because we can't be bothered.

Understand this, I am not saying I know what is right here I just know that decisions made by the above logic is wrong and selfish And I could never trust anyone who would use that sort of logic.

I understand that you were responding to Pio's post about letting people "solve their own damned problems", and I agree with you that it seems a bit cold and even selfish to leave people to sink or swim on their own. The problem with trying to intervene is this; There is nothing short of an invasion that the US could do in Iran to restore democratic government, and based on past experience (look at Iraq) it is unlikely that we could do so, even with that level of intervention.

You say it yourself, "We should do what we do based on what is right and best for all involved", in this case, "best for all involved" seems to be staying the hell out. The US has a pretty poor track record whenit comes to creating democracies where there were none before. Let them earn their democracy the way we did. If they want help, let them ask for it.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

I didn't miss it, but I only wanted to flame you for one post at a time. And no, I didn't think you would make such a suggestion, I was just pointing out that it's a slippery slope to equate government oppression of an opposition party with seeing woman in distress.



I understand that you were responding to Pio's post about letting people "solve their own damned problems", and I agree with you that it seems a bit cold and even selfish to leave people to sink or swim on their own. The problem with trying to intervene is this; There is nothing short of an invasion that the US could do in Iran to restore democratic government, and based on past experience (look at Iraq) it is unlikely that we could do so, even with that level of intervention.

You say it yourself, "We should do what we do based on what is right and best for all involved", in this case, "best for all involved" seems to be staying the hell out. The US has a pretty poor track record whenit comes to creating democracies where there were none before. Let them earn their democracy the way we did. If they want help, let them ask for it.

Just to clarify Joe, I do not necessarily think that leaving people to go it on their own is cold or selfish, in fact, I believe it is the best thing to do in many circumstances. What I am saying is that if we let people go it alone because we just cant be bothered or we have too much on our plate then our decision making is based in selfishness and not what is best and with that sort of decision making no matter how right the action, it will always be wrong and tainted because it stemmed from laziness or fear or self servitude and this will destroy the character of the nation little by little until we can no longer stand and we become maggot infested and easy pickings for the vultures.
Sometimes I think we are near that point already.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

...small tactical nuclear weapon which could fit in a suitcase, ...

I don't think such a thing exists or is even possible to construct, and if it were, North Korea, Iran, or any other small country would be completly unable to do it. The best they could do is a dirty bomb.

I am not a physicist, but I'm pretty certain that the ammount of fissable material required for a nuclear blast is too much to be carried in a small container. Furthermore, I believe that a person carrying such a device would likely die within a few minutes of picking up that suitcase, due to the lack of sheilding around the device.

Edit; With a little salt, Crow tastes just like chicken...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_bomb. I still believe that North Korea is unlikely to ever get one. But hey, there're a lot of crows out there, and I'm still hungry.

Originally Posted by JMS

... it will always be wrong and tainted because it stemmed from laziness or fear or self servitude and this will destroy the character of the nation little by little until we can no longer stand and we become maggot infested and easy pickings for the vultures.
Sometimes I think we are near that point already.

Why don't you tell us how you really feel.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

Why don't you tell us how you really feel.

Because I am a reserved kind of guy!