reply to post by seabag
He’s being forced to deal with it?
He created it! He should deal with it.
I disagree a lot with that statement.
Obama fell on the Presidency at a time where the U.S. were retreating and dealing with the problems of absence of power (governmental power). He might
be very well unfit to make those decisions and deal with the current foreign policy problems, but there is a big gap between him being unable, and him
being responsible for it.
What I meant with what I said, is that he is in a position where he can't show restrain nor weakness, and that is a very volatile and sensitive area
to be in. A small exchange of words and orders in the wrong direction, or at the wrong timing, and the protests - and possible conflicts - would
spread and burn
That’s what you get when you go booting heads of state and replacing them with radical Muslims who hate the US.
When did Obama put in place such policy? I'm not aware of it.
From my understanding, the U.S. Presidency - with Obama - made a clear step backwards in terms of foreign influence, especially in the Middle East.
He did what most americans were asking him to do: leave the ME, leave them alone, let them figure out things on their own.
And now the problem seems to be that Obama isn't showing enough strength, and that he should get in there guns blazing, rambo style, and throw out the
window all the diplomacy he worked hard to accomplish.
That diplomacy might have been wrong, weak and backfired. But still, he tried something different, and it appears that people have a lot of double
standards when talking about Obama's Presidency.
People should disagree, or agree with what he is doing. You can't disagree to agree, and then agree to disagree from week to another.
In my opinion, of course.
edit on 14-9-2012 by GarrusVasNormandy because: (no reason given)