US Foreign Policy Back On Pro-USA Track Due To Obama-Biden!

[mascale]

Apparently even World Stock Markets are celebrating the return of a viable, pro-American, U. S. foreign policy on the world stage. In the link, the one celebration is of the Obama-Biden policy of air support on behalf of US nationals in Iraq. The Mosul dam was retaken, and with Kurdish and Iraqi cooperation--with a new prime minister designate. The U. S. had no combatants on the ground, giving USA a bad name.

U.S. airstrikes critical in Mosul Dam capture - CNN.com

Soon Vice President Cheney can likely join in some actual dancing in the streets of Baghdad. All he would need is a Barack Obama mask--and some extra batteries, or something. Now with Obama-Biden now at work, Russia is now far less land-grabbing, in the Ukraine. Mostly, any anti-American riots, and troops in battle gear, are somewhere near St. Louis(?)! Likely even Moslems will wonder if any cost of being anti-American, is really even worth it, anymore(?)!

Some will recall that the Bush II, Term I, tax cuts had failed. In the name of hate of the USA, 19 suicide bombers were blown to atoms in plane crashes high atop City of New York. In the minds of US Republican policy-makers, clearly they were suddenly, everywhere! Some nature of "enemy" was seen headed east, into Pakistan. U.S. policy-makers shifted attention west, into Iraq. There was no further reason to even remain in Afghanistan. This was not about "Making Friends In The World" foreign policy. Mostly, "The Coalition," really didn't even exist. Even then Senator Biden would have to wonder if the Republicans were planning to provide the troops, even with minimum body armour.

The world, at last, is different from what it was--if only Ronald Reagan had been able to remember, anything about it(?). He was the one who created all the deficit spending, and sent it all along to the already prosperous, defense contractors. Bush I, Term I, inherited the resulting high unemployment, and impending economc crisis.

Peace and a different kind of Democrat of Democrat, would happen(?)! Rep. Charles Rangell would even comment that at least the new President might have brought some black faces, along with him, into office. Republicans were able to notice only, the one white woman(?).

"Crow, James Crow! Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Lands of Many Nations know young warrior, racing with the wind, ready to spread joy in great camps. . . . of the clothes-less.! Actually not too interested in dumping any tea into the ocean!)

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Good Lord.....

Send out the guys in white coats for this one.. seriously.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

I read this diatribe four times. I have no more knowledge of what this imbecile is trying to say than the first time I read it. I am assuming that it is an attempt to affirm the foreign policy of Barry's administration (I had to gag just even using the term 'foreign policy'). Obviously, he has NEVER been to Europe and talked with people and what they think of this AMATUER that we have in the White House. Let me clue you in teletubby, they want an American sitting in the White House who has some cajones and can actually lead the free world.

Shouldn't there be a test that people take BEFORE their allowed to post?

 

[B. Kidd]

There is no strategy to U.S. foreign policy from this administration. OP is hallucinating.

 

[mascale]

Anyone notes the Republican tendency to follow along the Moses Atrocity, that a deity exists. It is a deity of the chosen people, the Hebrews. Foreign Policy to Republicans, follows along Deuteronomy 23:19-20:
“You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but you may not charge your brother interest, that the Lord your God may bless you in all that you undertake in the land that you are entering to take possession of it."

When it comes to foreigners, "Screw "Em!" Many can say that it even starts really near to modern-day Israel, in Palestine.

That application of the Demonic Atrocity was rejected in Council of Jerusalem, about AD 50. Cajones were at issue in the new Christian agenda, but not in any deity-based context. Circumcision, and other aspects of the original Moses Atrocity, were not to be a part of the New Testament. An atheist basis, essentially, was created. The Moses Atrocity had blown it, not even too thrilled with bacon and eggs--in the same context with the various sexual practices, now understood and a part of civil law.

Usury had been described in Matthew 25:14-30. The usury earnings are worthless at the lower end of the income scale. The human with the one talent, is smart enough to bury it--for all the good the earnings will do. In the recent foreclosure crisis, the rich houses all came tumbling on down. Fittingly, many had Jewish-based names.

The foreclosure crisis had been created in the Republican agenda. Rep Frank, and Senator Dodd, and others, would start the long process of undoing that allegedly, "policy." Even Adam Smith, in "Wealth of Nations," had missed the point of the New Testament. The Moses Atrocity, shown in Matthew 25:14-30, doesn't work. Smith called it a "Free Market," with basis in "Laissez Faire," and include a usury basis as a part of it. Shown in Matthew 25:14-30, it doesn't work.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Commencing the final solution to the Presbyterian Question: "Just where is all this money going to come from?!)

 

[NotfooledbyW]

There is no strategy to U.S. foreign policy from this administration.

What was the strategy of the US Administration that preceded the current one? Is it one you are fond of?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Let me clue you in teletubby, they want an American sitting in the White House who has some cajones and can actually lead the free world.

Why don't the Europeans elect their own leaders with cojones and lead the free world their damned selves? Are we to be subjects of your mythological war mongering Europeans, advising our leaders to do and answer to Europe?

 

[tinydancer]

This thread has earned my first smilie in the new format.

:

 

[NotfooledbyW]

This thread has earned my first smilie in the new format.

:

Is it my comment that you don't know how to respond to? Or is it the posting by someone else?

 

[blackhawk]

Who's foreign policy was it that allowed ISIS to take control of large sections of Syria and Iraq? Much of which they still control.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Who's foreign policy was it that allowed ISIS to take control of large sections of Syria and Iraq? Much of which they still control.

Who's foreign policy could have prevented what happened in Syria or Iraq? Nobody had any better ideas at the time. As it turns out Obama's policy of now allowing the USAF and NAVY engage as part of Maliki's Shiite Army is turning out to be the right one. Iraq has not fallen to ISIL. And Sunni fighters are with the Government troops clearing their territory of the ISIL menace. That likely would not be occurring had the US began bombing all Sunni militants to get at the ISIL barbarian terrorists. It would not work from the sky. Most thinking people know that. And ground combat troops from the US will never thankfully ever be sent in. If Iraqis want ISIL out of the country they must drive them out, with our coordinated support.. for Shia Kurd and Sunni alike.

You tell me what could have been done in this situation.

Read this and get back to me.

Anbar Iraq Business News


An Excerpt: This was published in March this year:

The armed groups in Fallujah consist primarily of fighters organized under the so-called “military council for the tribes of Fallujah.” These fighters are affiliated with armed groups that are not linked to ISIS, such as the Army of the Naqshbandi Way, Hamas Iraq, Jaish al-Murabitoun, Jaish al-Islami and Katayeb Thwarat al-Ishreen, in addition to Salafist fighters affiliated with the international al-Qaeda organization and not loyal to ISIS.

These Salafist fighters previously fought with Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria. In addition, there are less organized fighters affiliated with the local clans and led by Sheikh Ali Hatem al-Suleiman.

ISIS fighters used to be present amid those overlapping forces, but under the guise of coming to help the local fighters unconditionally. Thus, ISIS avoided colliding with tribal groups and agreed to requests to stop fighting or lead operations.

However, during the past month, the relationship between these parties has changed. Most of the forces in the military council of the tribes were close to accepting a reconciliation with the government to prevent the Iraqi army from entering Fallujah, put an end to the fighting and achieve some Sunni demands.
That reconciliation would have threatened ISIS’ vision, one that does not include reconciliation.

What does the US military do about that ISIS infiltration into Sunni Tribal militias that were on our side until Maliki alienated the Sunnis and refused to correct it. Do we bomb Sunnis to save Maliki's ass? What? You have no idea do you?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Twilight Zone material lol

 

[blackhawk]

Who's foreign policy was it that allowed ISIS to take control of large sections of Syria and Iraq? Much of which they still control.

Who's foreign policy could have prevented what happened in Syria or Iraq? Nobody had any better ideas at the time. As it turns out Obama's policy of now allowing the USAF and NAVY engage as part of Maliki's Shiite Army is turning out to be the right one. Iraq has not fallen to ISIL. And Sunni fighters are with the Government troops clearing their territory of the ISIL menace. That likely would not be occurring had the US began bombing all Sunni militants to get at the ISIL barbarian terrorists. It would not work from the sky. Most thinking people know that. And ground combat troops from the US will never thankfully ever be sent in. If Iraqis want ISIL out of the country they must drive them out, with our coordinated support.. for Shia Kurd and Sunni alike.

You tell me what could have been done in this situation.

Read this and get back to me.

Anbar Iraq Business News


An Excerpt: This was published in March this year:

The armed groups in Fallujah consist primarily of fighters organized under the so-called “military council for the tribes of Fallujah.” These fighters are affiliated with armed groups that are not linked to ISIS, such as the Army of the Naqshbandi Way, Hamas Iraq, Jaish al-Murabitoun, Jaish al-Islami and Katayeb Thwarat al-Ishreen, in addition to Salafist fighters affiliated with the international al-Qaeda organization and not loyal to ISIS.

These Salafist fighters previously fought with Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria. In addition, there are less organized fighters affiliated with the local clans and led by Sheikh Ali Hatem al-Suleiman.

ISIS fighters used to be present amid those overlapping forces, but under the guise of coming to help the local fighters unconditionally. Thus, ISIS avoided colliding with tribal groups and agreed to requests to stop fighting or lead operations.

However, during the past month, the relationship between these parties has changed. Most of the forces in the military council of the tribes were close to accepting a reconciliation with the government to prevent the Iraqi army from entering Fallujah, put an end to the fighting and achieve some Sunni demands.
That reconciliation would have threatened ISIS’ vision, one that does not include reconciliation.

What does the US military do about that ISIS infiltration into Sunni Tribal militias that were on our side until Maliki alienated the Sunnis and refused to correct it. Do we bomb Sunnis to save Maliki's ass? What? You have no idea do you?

What could have been done is hit them as soon as they crossed into Iraq not waiting until they took dozens of towns and killed thousands. Sitting back and doing nothing till a situation becomes so horrible you can no longer ignore it is not great foreign policy or leadership.

 

[deltex1]

This thread has earned my first smilie in the new format.

:

Is it my comment that you don't know how to respond to? Or is it the posting by someone else?

Let me clue you in teletubby, they want an American sitting in the White House who has some cajones and can actually lead the free world.

Why don't the Europeans elect their own leaders with cojones and lead the free world their damned selves? Are we to be subjects of your mythological war mongering Europeans, advising our leaders to do and answer to Europe?

Is Vlad not tough enough for you, Foo?