Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama's Speech On Syria: Your Thoughts  
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2451 posts, RR: 1
Posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2031 times:

This is a thread on you thoughts on Barack Obama's speech on Syria from tonight September 10.

Please, keep this clean and civil. No personal attacks.

I thought it was a very bold speech.


A landing EVERYONE can walk away from, is a good landing.
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3645 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2018 times:

It was the most important speech on TV this week that everyone seemed to know exactly what was going to be said beforehand. I don't think anything he said was a surprise to anyone. Now, if the Russian deal hadn't taken center state today it might have been a bit different but Obama seems to have a way out of this military strike and I think he will take it, and I would support that.

User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5945 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1989 times:

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 1):
Obama seems to have a way out of this military strike and I think he will take it, and I would support that

  

The military option should not be off the table IMHO, but if there is a way to avoid a direct conflict then that is a positive.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29836 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1856 times:

I have much better things to do with my time than to watch a speech by that putz.

Spending an hour getting lied to by him trying to save face is not my idea of time well spent.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinebmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2379 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1815 times:

That speech was 100 times better than George W Bush's March 17, 2003 address saying Saddam had 48 hours to leave Iraq. At least Obama is saying he prefers the diplomatic approach first.

And no, I didn't hear any lies regarding Syria having WMDs or CWs.

[Edited 2013-09-11 10:45:11]


The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently offlinecv640 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 952 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1770 times:

I'm guessing if you like him it was great, if you don't it was horrible. I think that will cover 90% of the replies here.

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7970 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1743 times:

Well the speech was 10 minutes of rehashing old info, a bunch of talking and drivel, and then 5 minutes of addressing key issues, which in my opinion were contradictory.


Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11801 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1731 times:

I don't understand the "war is the only answer" mentality of some people. If chemical weapons/WMDs can be taken away with little or no money we don't have being spent, isn't that better than the world thinking we are idiots for starting ANOTHER endless war?


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3645 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1730 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 3):
Spending an hour getting lied to by him trying to save face is not my idea of time well spent.

I don't like Obama but it really wasn't anything any other president wouldn't have said. He railed against the use of chemical weapons and talked about a military action against Assad. Bush, Clinton, Reagan, etc would probably have made similar speeches.

I fail to see how he is saving face? Shouldn't taking all options into account be considered something good? Again, I'm not an Obama supporter and yeah, I do think he got in over his head with the redline comment, but this new development is a good thing. One, it keeps us from bombing in the Middle East yet again and, two, will get most it not all chemical weapons out of Syria. I fail to see the negative here?


User currently offlinen318ea From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1715 times:

Took 3rd reply to blame Bush. Is that a record?

User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1709 times:

Great op/ed in today's WSJ.

Here's the link:

wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324094704579066774128762480.html?mod=hp_opinion



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1636 times:

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 8):
I don't like Obama but it really wasn't anything any other president wouldn't have said. He railed against the use of chemical weapons and talked about a military action against Assad. Bush, Clinton, Reagan, etc would probably have made similar speeches.

I fail to see how he is saving face? Shouldn't taking all options into account be considered something good? Again, I'm not an Obama supporter and yeah, I do think he got in over his head with the redline comment, but this new development is a good thing. One, it keeps us from bombing in the Middle East yet again and, two, will get most it not all chemical weapons out of Syria. I fail to see the negative here?

I think the Obama administration's handling of international affairs over the last few years has been incompetent, but nor more or less so than US foreign policy has been for at least the last three presidential administrations. What is different is the degree of opposition he faces domestically on issues like gun control, Obamacare, spying on US citizens and the economy...and those who oppose what he wants to do inside the US are more than happy to paint him as a bozo in his dealings outside the US because it suits their overall purpose.

At any rate, being President of the United States is the ultimate fool's errand. People act like they want a 'Dictator' (by the Roman Republic definition) but then resent any unilateral action that the Dictator takes. Then if he seeks instead to build consensus and/or obtain a legislative mandate for warfare or any other substantial action (as our Constitution would suggest is appropriate) he's dismissed as spineless when the opposing political party inevitably stonewalls. You couldn't pay me enough to do that job.

On this specific topic I think Syria is a huge tar baby that we'd be well advised not to take hold of. If that means Vlad the Impaler can strut around like he's calling the shots then so be it...Russia will reap what they are sowing so close to their own nest soon enough.

The United States' long term security has nothing to do with what does or does not happen in any other regions or countries, or any exciting things like military hardware, air strikes, embargoes or invasions. It will rely on the incredibly mundane challenge of attaining and perpetuating such a level of excellence in science, health, industry, literacy and critical thought that wherever we go and whatever we say people are listening carefully because we have our act completely together and they realize that being on our good side is in their best interest. As opposed to merely fearing whatever knee-jerk military action our President may or may not be able to pull off at a particular point in time.

Unfortunately that excites most sheeple about as much as putting the $1.99 ice cream tub back in the freezer, reading a real book or going for a run first thing in the morning.

/rant


User currently offlineSoJo From UK - England, joined Nov 2012, 206 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1597 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Serious question folks. Is his middle name really Hussein? Just asking


RAF Abingdon 1967. I met Beverley from Blackburn. Fantastic!
User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 721 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1576 times:

Quoting SoJo (Reply 12):

Serious question folks. Is his middle name really Hussein? Just asking

Yes, it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama



So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7979 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1558 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
I don't understand the "war is the only answer" mentality of some people. If chemical weapons/WMDs can be taken away with little or no money we don't have being spent, isn't that better than the world thinking we are idiots for starting ANOTHER endless war?

To be fair, I think most of the GOP wants nothing at all to do with Syria. Yeah, maybe if there was a Republican in office they'd think differently, who knows, but I don't think there are many GOP politicians that want more war.

Actually, who are the big players in this that want intervention in Syria? We keep talking about invading them yet it seems like most politicians and citizens don't want to



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1547 times:

Assad now demands the US stop their "threats". (He makes no mention of his own "threats" or Putin's). Demands shipments of weapons to Rebels be stopped. (While he still gladly accepts conventional weapons shipments from the Russians, Iranians and North Koreans that are arriving daily). What a POS.  


"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1545 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 14):

Actually, who are the big players in this that want intervention in Syria? We keep talking about invading them yet it seems like most politicians and citizens don't want to

Actually remember how Reagan bankrupted the USSR with the arms race back in the 1980s? Could it be that interested parties want the US to be permanently bogged down in some unwinable war in some Middle Eastern hellhole, using up all of it´s military resources? Obama wanted to get out of the Middle East to shift the US´s attention towards the Pacific region. Who is interested in keeping the US out of the Western Pacific region?

Jan

[Edited 2013-09-12 11:36:51]

User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1539 times:

Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 15):
Assad now demands the US stop their "threats". (He makes no mention of his own "threats" or Putin's). Demands shipments of weapons to Rebels be stopped. (While he still gladly accepts conventional weapons shipments from the Russians, Iranians and North Koreans that are arriving daily). What a POS.

Whom would you rather have on Israel´s northern border? A reasonable rational dictator, who talks big for internal consumption, but else is only interrested in keeping his cronies and himself in the gravy pots, or some rabid religious fanatics with a suicidical ideology, who don´t care if themselves or anybody else gets killed in their aim to destroy Israel?
Mind I support the peaceful existence israels in the borders of 1967 and a close cooperation with the Palaesintian Arabs for the good of both.

The original moderate rebels have long gone. The West made the mistake of not supporting them, so the religious nutters financed by Saudi Arabia (maybe not the government, but there are enough rich people there, who think that they can buy their entry into heaven if they support the fanatics) have long taken over. The seculars of the FSA have long disappeared and have been replaced by the Wahabi fanatics of the Al Nusra militia, which has close ties to Al Qaeda. Do you really want those people to be in charge of a country bordering Israel and with possible access to chemical weapons?

Jan


User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3379 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1518 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 14):
To be fair, I think most of the GOP wants nothing at all to do with Syria.

Now they don't. The story a few months ago was different. If you've paid careful attention to the politics, you'll notice that since the start of the official 2012 campaign, both sides spoke of a "red line". Once the "red line" was crossed, you saw GOP politicians blaming Obama for not taking action and urging to strike Syria. Obama agrees to do so, and they cry foul, that he must go through Congress. He goes to Congress, and now they're backing out. It's a case of being a two-faced politician: they were for it before it became against it. Whether they'd do that with any Democrat or simply Obama is a different matter, but many in the GOP have flipped 180 on their positions.

On a side note, I didn't see the speech and I don't think I will. There's nothing he will say that isn't new to us and with the Kerry/Russian proposal on the table and possibly averting a strike, I don't think there's an urge to convince anyone of anything except to give diplomacy time.

If there's one thing I can say about the foreign policy under Obama is that it has been characterized by restraint and letting things solve themselves before any force is necessary. Why are we so keen to attack Iran and prevent a nuclear weapon yet not attack Syria where dozens are dying every month? To say that his foreign policy has been incompetent would be a blatant lie. It hasn't been the best, but certainly far from the worst.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlinedeltadawg From United States of America, joined May 2006, 782 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1516 times:

No President in history seems to make as much of an idiot out of himself as Mr. Obama. He portrays limp, indecisive, leaderless qualities to a maximum. The speech was lackluster, repetitive, incoherent at times and out right boring. Throughout the situation with Syria and Russia our illustrious Hope and Change master has been outplayed, out maneuvered and out smarted by both Assad and especially Putin. He has done nothing but show his ineptness and incompetence at every turn. The speech is but a culmination in his inexperience and lack of foresight and understanding of how the REAL world works and revolves. This is not MTV's the Real World but the actual real world where community organizers are chewed up and spit out on the world stage.

This Syrian debacle, that Mr. Obama started, has done more to damage his reputation and our nations reputation than any other of his lies or inexcusable platitudes of inexperience. It has truly shown him for what he actually is, a community organizer!

Thanks for posting this thread. Have a great day.



GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1514 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
If there's one thing I can say about the foreign policy under Obama is that it has been characterized by restraint and letting things solve themselves before any force is necessary.

I discussed this topic today with an American friend. I mentioned that Obama seems to be very much in the tradition of Theodore Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick!". If necessary he ordered military action. Quite unlike G.W.Bush, who had been acting like a chickenhawk. She agreed.

Jan


User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1502 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 17):
Al Qaeda

You forgot to mention Hezbollah. I think Iran is in this pretty deep and likely playing both sides against each other. Deeper than the Saudis.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 17):
Mind I support the peaceful existence israels in the borders of 1967 and a close cooperation with the Palaesintian Arabs for the good of both.

Snap out of that idealistic dream, friend. Never going to happen.

That conversation is for another thread. I will stay on topic here which is about Syria.



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3379 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1465 times:

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 19):
how the REAL world works and revolves

Enlighten us, then, on "how the REAL world works and revolves". And since you're so knowledgeable, why don't you run for president?

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 19):
This Syrian debacle, that Mr. Obama started, has done more to damage his reputation and our nations reputation than any other of his lies or inexcusable platitudes of inexperience.

Because Iraq was a success in establishing the US's reputation in the world. Because the death of Osama bin Laden only harmed the US's reputation as a nation committed to "bringing justice to those who have it coming to them". Because the ever increasing drone attacks only serve to note how namby-pamby the US is. And (this is my favorite), because the fact that Republicans were for military intervention before they were against it in Syria doesn't do pipsqueak to their reputation.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlinedeltadawg From United States of America, joined May 2006, 782 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1460 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 22):
Enlighten us, then, on "how the REAL world works and revolves". And since you're so knowledgeable, why don't you run for president?

No need to explain it at this moment. Vladimir Putin is doing a fine job of showing him who is boss. The U.S.'s stature is diminished by this episode as well as last year's in Libya. Kill our Ambassador and we will do nothing. Putin is eating his lunch and spoon feeding s**t to Obama left and right.

If I had 50-100 million dollars I probably would run but seeing that I have to work to pay for all the non-working freeloaders health insurance I just cant do that at the moment. Wait, whose idea was it for the working class to pay for the non-working? Obama's. What ever happened to self reliance, self determination and self direction?



GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Obama's Speech On Financial Regulatory Reform posted Mon Sep 14 2009 23:34:28 by Propilot83
Obama's Oxymoron Speech On College And Jobs. posted Mon Aug 9 2010 08:41:37 by fxramper
Comments On Obama's Speech June 16th posted Tue Jun 15 2010 18:04:51 by Dreadnought
Medical Folks: Your Thoughts On Rural Hospitals posted Wed Dec 10 2008 14:31:02 by JCS17
Your Thoughts On A College Dilemma! posted Sat Jun 9 2007 02:45:07 by JBLUA320
What Are Your Thoughts On Mexico? posted Mon May 14 2007 16:29:36 by Captaink
Your Thoughts On Norway posted Sun Sep 24 2006 18:17:50 by Speedbird747BA
Your Thoughts On AK Senator Stevens posted Wed Apr 5 2006 23:21:24 by Bushpilot
Your Thoughts On Alpizar's Shooting posted Fri Dec 9 2005 17:48:28 by Tbar220
Your Thoughts On DoubleClick posted Wed Sep 21 2005 14:41:37 by UTA_flyinghigh