President Obama on Defense

Navy1960

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2008
5,821
1,322
48
Arizona
In his first major public address, White House National Security Advisor James Jones described the Obama administration's still-evolving foreign policy approach as one that will be proactive while reaching out to other nations.

On issues such as the proliferation of the world's most deadly weapons to how Washington should respond to North Korea's alleged nuclear test, Jones made clear in his May 27 speech that President Barack Obama intends to avoid the go-it-alone approaches often employed by the Bush administration.

Jones Offers Glimpse of U.S. Security Policy - Defense News

Russian arms export body Rosoboronexport is looking to offset its declining presence in traditional markets with a goal of "penetrating the markets of other countries", where the key competitor will be the United States.

The comments (relayed by Russian state information service RIA Novosti on 27 May) came from Rosoboronexport executive Valeriy Varlamov, who argued that "Rosoboronexport's sales grow by USD700-800 million every year" and "despite the economic crisis the year of 2009 will not be an exception".
Briefing: Can Russia take on US in global market?

On Monday, Gates announced that production of the F-22 would be halted at 187. That shouldn't be too controversial given that only 183 were ordered, but components for the Lockheed fighter jet are built in 44 states, giving it a great deal of political support.

Gates also proposed scrapping new helicopters, next-generation armored vehicles for the Army and high-tech Navy vessels. At the same time, he would increase spending in other areas, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, F-35 fighter jets and special forces troops. The eminently sensible goal is to shift priorities to fighting insurgencies like those in Iraq and Afghanistan rather than continuing to pour money into systems intended for fighting conventional wars against great powers like Russia and China.
Obama's defense cuts are just right - Los Angeles Times

While it is obvious that President Obama is seeking out what I would call the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy, it is somewhat . given the deployment of US combat forces in two different A.O.'s, shortsighted on his part and dangerous to say the least. While I for one think it's high time that the DoD be held to some standard of purchasing, I do not think that means adding more waste to the system or for that matter cutting defense in a time of active combat. Further, given the recent actions of North Korea it should add another example as to why this nation should not be cutting it's defense. President Obama must realize that no matter how much he may wish it, there are nations out there that do not like the United States and no amount of talking or culture sharing will change that.
 
President Obama must realize that no matter how much he may wish it, there are nations out there that do not like the United States and no amount of talking or culture sharing will change that.

And there are some out there who can be pulled over to our side. The tough task is to determine which ones will and which ones will remain our enemy or at least not be our allies.


Examples for thought: Germany, Japan, Vietnam, China?
 
While I am an advocate of diplomacy Ray, I am also an advocate that you must be prepared when doing so. It serves no useful purpose to appease those who would cause you harm and at the same time while talking appear weak on defense. It is one thing to talk on an equal footing but another for someone realize that the nation you represent is always prepared to meet any adversary. More of the peace through stregth mantra if you will. Germany, Japan, I would agree with you completely as far as being allies to the United States. Vietnam and China am not so sure about yet* I say yet because China especially has demonstrated over and over again a willingness to help anyone that will do business with them regardless of what they represent. I find it interesting though that all four of them at one time or the other our nation has had armed conflict with and isnt it interesting that prior to all of them there was talking save for perhaps vietnam and it could be argued that even there before during and after was a lot of talking going on.
 
I'm sorry Derek but what exactly does 65% mean? Approval for what? and whom? and who were the people polled. That number meand nothing to me as it would if it said. every republican had a 99% approval rating.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Georgia's defense minister is warning about Russia's military buildup as he meets with Obama administration officials in Washington this week.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Defense Minister Vasil Sikharulidze and Georgia's ambassador to Washington, Batu Kutelia, said that Russia has vastly improved communication and supply lines on breakaway Georgian territory since the two countries fought a war last August.

Sikharulidze is meeting officials this week, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Thursday, at a time when the U.S. administration is trying to improve relations with Russia.

President Barack Obama is heading to Russia next month for a summit meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, as the United State seeks Moscow's cooperation on vital policy goals including reining in North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs. Though Washington considers Georgia a close ally, Tbilisi fears that U.S. support could flag.
The Associated Press: Georgian officials in US warn of Russian buildup

A little food for thought here.
 
I'm sorry Derek but what exactly does 65% mean? Approval for what? and whom? and who were the people polled. That number meand nothing to me as it would if it said. every republican had a 99% approval rating.

I love this web site! I enjoy watching Republicans squirm like this. You guys are so desperate. You don't even know if your party can make it through another election. Thank you for the entertainment. Why not bring Sarah Palin back for President! Good God ya'll!
 
Well Derek as you are so fond of polls lets put this into some perspective then depending on what poll you read President Obama's approval rating runs between 55 and 62% currently. That would put him pretty close to where Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon were after their first 100 days in office and we all know what great presidents they turned out to be. As for you assumption that everyone that does not support Barack Obama happens to support whomever the republican party put up i.e. Sarah Palin in my case your dead wrong. I just happen to think that Barack Obama is wholly unqualified to be President of the United States and his management style thus far is proving me correct regardless of how many in the democratic party fawn all over him or new anchors bow before him. On a personal level I harbor President Obama no ill will and actually hope that he is successful in getting this nation back on it's feet. However, I don't keep much faith that this will be the case As for this place being entertaining I happen to agree with you and in daily reminds me of the very reason that Barack Obama got elected in the first place.
 
I love the one about the US going it alone. Never fucking happened. In fact I REALLY love it when people say Europe was opposed to the Iraq war. Then we look and the ONLY 4 nations in Europe opposed were France and Germany, both wanting to get business from Iraq, and those power houses Belgium and Luxembourg.

The rest of Europe SUPPORTED the WAR. Even Pacifist Japan SUPPORTED the WAR.

Nothing Bush did was every alone. Claiming it repeatedly does not make it so.
 
We paid them enough to support the war. And the support was of the government, not the people. Most realized, as most in this nation eventually realized, it was the biggest single policy blunder in the last century. Now you fellows have to live with the blowback from a war based on lies and an occupation so incompetantly administered that there was never a chance of Iraq being pacified.
 
We paid them enough to support the war. And the support was of the government, not the people. Most realized, as most in this nation eventually realized, it was the biggest single policy blunder in the last century. Now you fellows have to live with the blowback from a war based on lies and an occupation so incompetantly administered that there was never a chance of Iraq being pacified.

Ever hear the phrase "Germans are industrious people" ... bribery is a short term solution, they didn't have the financial power to risk angering Iraq, and it was probably the only reason their government didn't support the war, why risk making an enemy from those who offer them enough profit to stay afloat. What we gave them isn't nearly as much as Iraq still does (in spite of the war). They did what they thought best, just as we did. Now, the war itself was not based on lies, it was based on the fact that Iraq started it junior decided to finish it. It was what we were told that were lies, and well, you can blame the media for that.
 
We paid them enough to support the war. And the support was of the government, not the people. Most realized, as most in this nation eventually realized, it was the biggest single policy blunder in the last century. Now you fellows have to live with the blowback from a war based on lies and an occupation so incompetantly administered that there was never a chance of Iraq being pacified.

LIAR. Iraq IS taking over its own borders and internal security right now, something you dumb asses claimed would never happen. Our Combat troops are leaving as planned by Bush, though Obama will probably rewrite History and claim he did it. And you retards will be right there claiming it also.

Now then back to the claim Bush lied, you have had 7 YEARS to prove it and have failed at every turn. We were told "vote for Democrats? they would prove Bush lied us into war. And yet 2 years later no such proof exists.

In fact EVERY commission, every Congressional Board Both Republican and Democratic has found Bush DID NOT lie.

Your talking points need to be updated you dip shit, when your lies are as blatant and ignorant as these , no wonder more and more are coming to realize you people simply can not tell the truth.
 
While it is obvious that President Obama is seeking out what I would call the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy, it is somewhat . given the deployment of US combat forces in two different A.O.'s, shortsighted on his part and dangerous to say the least. While I for one think it's high time that the DoD be held to some standard of purchasing, I do not think that means adding more waste to the system or for that matter cutting defense in a time of active combat. Further, given the recent actions of North Korea it should add another example as to why this nation should not be cutting it's defense. President Obama must realize that no matter how much he may wish it, there are nations out there that do not like the United States and no amount of talking or culture sharing will change that.

Here it is, in a nutshell, why you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Show me any cuts that might affect how we handle N. Korea.

If you have no examples, then you are a right winger who doesn't really want to lower the debt. You're just tea bagging Obama.

You said "N. Korea is why we shouldn't be cutting our defense". What cuts are you referring to? Show me one cut that could affect how we handle the N. Korean issue.

And you said this, "Obama is seeking out the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy"

And again, i call BULLSHIT!!! He is seeking out approval of other nations. He's mending fenses the GOP broke for their own $ gains. Yes, we are sorry that Bush started a war for profit. IRAQ. We shouldn't have done it.

And how is the approval of other nations going to guide us? Or why shouldn't it. Explain this nonsense. You mean he's going to make friends so we don't have to go to war? Good idea.

And is that anything like how Bush exploited Israel/American Jews/Liebermann to keep the Iraq war going? Another big expense for America. $10 bill a month.
 
Well Derek as you are so fond of polls lets put this into some perspective then depending on what poll you read President Obama's approval rating runs between 55 and 62% currently. That would put him pretty close to where Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon were after their first 100 days in office and we all know what great presidents they turned out to be. As for you assumption that everyone that does not support Barack Obama happens to support whomever the republican party put up i.e. Sarah Palin in my case your dead wrong. I just happen to think that Barack Obama is wholly unqualified to be President of the United States and his management style thus far is proving me correct regardless of how many in the democratic party fawn all over him or new anchors bow before him. On a personal level I harbor President Obama no ill will and actually hope that he is successful in getting this nation back on it's feet. However, I don't keep much faith that this will be the case As for this place being entertaining I happen to agree with you and in daily reminds me of the very reason that Barack Obama got elected in the first place.


1. You aren't helping matters with your bullshit and negativity.

2. You're wrong and a hater.

3. Who would you want to lead the nation?

4. I don't think you're being honest with us, and I'm a pretty good judge of these things. I smell a right winger big time. But one that comes at us like he's an independant. :eusa_liar:
 
While it is obvious that President Obama is seeking out what I would call the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy, it is somewhat . given the deployment of US combat forces in two different A.O.'s, shortsighted on his part and dangerous to say the least. While I for one think it's high time that the DoD be held to some standard of purchasing, I do not think that means adding more waste to the system or for that matter cutting defense in a time of active combat. Further, given the recent actions of North Korea it should add another example as to why this nation should not be cutting it's defense. President Obama must realize that no matter how much he may wish it, there are nations out there that do not like the United States and no amount of talking or culture sharing will change that.

Here it is, in a nutshell, why you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Show me any cuts that might affect how we handle N. Korea.

If you have no examples, then you are a right winger who doesn't really want to lower the debt. You're just tea bagging Obama.

You said "N. Korea is why we shouldn't be cutting our defense". What cuts are you referring to? Show me one cut that could affect how we handle the N. Korean issue.

And you said this, "Obama is seeking out the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy"

And again, i call BULLSHIT!!! He is seeking out approval of other nations. He's mending fenses the GOP broke for their own $ gains. Yes, we are sorry that Bush started a war for profit. IRAQ. We shouldn't have done it.

And how is the approval of other nations going to guide us? Or why shouldn't it. Explain this nonsense. You mean he's going to make friends so we don't have to go to war? Good idea.

And is that anything like how Bush exploited Israel/American Jews/Liebermann to keep the Iraq war going? Another big expense for America. $10 bill a month.

Ohh look, one of the board idiots trying to argue in the light of day. Crawl back into your hole Troll. Go collect up some talking points from your masters before you come back.

As for CUTS, ANY cuts of the current military are bad, we need MORE spent on the military not LESS. It is one of the very few things the Constitution actually gives Congress the power to pay for. As opposed to health and welfare, social programs and all the bullshit commerce clause lies we have had shoved down our throat the last 70 years.
 
Well Derek as you are so fond of polls lets put this into some perspective then depending on what poll you read President Obama's approval rating runs between 55 and 62% currently. That would put him pretty close to where Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon were after their first 100 days in office and we all know what great presidents they turned out to be. As for you assumption that everyone that does not support Barack Obama happens to support whomever the republican party put up i.e. Sarah Palin in my case your dead wrong. I just happen to think that Barack Obama is wholly unqualified to be President of the United States and his management style thus far is proving me correct regardless of how many in the democratic party fawn all over him or new anchors bow before him. On a personal level I harbor President Obama no ill will and actually hope that he is successful in getting this nation back on it's feet. However, I don't keep much faith that this will be the case As for this place being entertaining I happen to agree with you and in daily reminds me of the very reason that Barack Obama got elected in the first place.


1. You aren't helping matters with your bullshit and negativity.

2. You're wrong and a hater.

3. Who would you want to lead the nation?

4. I don't think you're being honest with us, and I'm a pretty good judge of these things. I smell a right winger big time. But one that comes at us like he's an independant. :eusa_liar:

You are so far up Obama's ass you can not see anything but his colon. Go collect some talking points and come back you troll.
 
While it is obvious that President Obama is seeking out what I would call the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy, it is somewhat . given the deployment of US combat forces in two different A.O.'s, shortsighted on his part and dangerous to say the least. While I for one think it's high time that the DoD be held to some standard of purchasing, I do not think that means adding more waste to the system or for that matter cutting defense in a time of active combat. Further, given the recent actions of North Korea it should add another example as to why this nation should not be cutting it's defense. President Obama must realize that no matter how much he may wish it, there are nations out there that do not like the United States and no amount of talking or culture sharing will change that.

Here it is, in a nutshell, why you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Show me any cuts that might affect how we handle N. Korea.

If you have no examples, then you are a right winger who doesn't really want to lower the debt. You're just tea bagging Obama.

You said "N. Korea is why we shouldn't be cutting our defense". What cuts are you referring to? Show me one cut that could affect how we handle the N. Korean issue.

And you said this, "Obama is seeking out the approval of other nations to guide this nations defense policy"

And again, i call BULLSHIT!!! He is seeking out approval of other nations. He's mending fenses the GOP broke for their own $ gains. Yes, we are sorry that Bush started a war for profit. IRAQ. We shouldn't have done it.

And how is the approval of other nations going to guide us? Or why shouldn't it. Explain this nonsense. You mean he's going to make friends so we don't have to go to war? Good idea.

And is that anything like how Bush exploited Israel/American Jews/Liebermann to keep the Iraq war going? Another big expense for America. $10 bill a month.

Ohh look, one of the board idiots trying to argue in the light of day. Crawl back into your hole Troll. Go collect up some talking points from your masters before you come back.

As for CUTS, ANY cuts of the current military are bad, we need MORE spent on the military not LESS. It is one of the very few things the Constitution actually gives Congress the power to pay for. As opposed to health and welfare, social programs and all the bullshit commerce clause lies we have had shoved down our throat the last 70 years.

OMG! Thank you for proving my point bitch. You are not a fiscal conservative and you would never balance a budget is what you are admitting. Or, to do so, you would cut out social programs that are important.

If ANYONE agrees with this schmuck, let me know. ANY CUTS to the current military are bad. ANY? OMG! Half of it was bullshit wasteful/useless/bloated/sweetheart/nobid/pentagon good old boys spending. There was this guy who was a Bush buddy/donor and he made a jeep that tipped at 30 mph. His product was crap.

Or what about Blackwater in Iraq. We're leaving Iraq. Aren't they coming home too? See, this is why you don't launch a war for profit. The profiteer never want the war to end. So we pay $10 billion a month.

You don't want to cut any of it out? :lol:

You allowed the GOP to double the debt in the name of defense and the constitution? :cuckoo:

When are these defense dollars going to start trickling down. Oh, I forgot, Haloburton are now HQ'ed in the Arab Emerits. We'll never see that money again!! Schmuck!!
 
Well Derek as you are so fond of polls lets put this into some perspective then depending on what poll you read President Obama's approval rating runs between 55 and 62% currently. That would put him pretty close to where Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon were after their first 100 days in office and we all know what great presidents they turned out to be. As for you assumption that everyone that does not support Barack Obama happens to support whomever the republican party put up i.e. Sarah Palin in my case your dead wrong. I just happen to think that Barack Obama is wholly unqualified to be President of the United States and his management style thus far is proving me correct regardless of how many in the democratic party fawn all over him or new anchors bow before him. On a personal level I harbor President Obama no ill will and actually hope that he is successful in getting this nation back on it's feet. However, I don't keep much faith that this will be the case As for this place being entertaining I happen to agree with you and in daily reminds me of the very reason that Barack Obama got elected in the first place.


1. You aren't helping matters with your bullshit and negativity.

2. You're wrong and a hater.

3. Who would you want to lead the nation?

4. I don't think you're being honest with us, and I'm a pretty good judge of these things. I smell a right winger big time. But one that comes at us like he's an independant. :eusa_liar:

You are so far up Obama's ass you can not see anything but his colon. Go collect some talking points and come back you troll.

Are talking points when I rebutt the bullshit you say? No cuts in defense. HA!! Yea, the world is soooo dangerous.

Hey asshole. Cheney and you don't scare us anymore. Enough of the Cheney speechest. Makes you seem out of touch and outdated. Old cooter.
 
The Prophet is essentially a graduate student learning on the job. Fine. He is not the first one.

My take on his foreign policy to include defense, is that he is

1: trying counter-propaganda out. It may work here and there and/or at least change the game a bit; and

2: has no defense backup plan. His advisors probably do not see anything apart from all-out war as being remotely feasible, and that is questionable given the current politics and economic situation we find ourselves and the social spending we are talking about.

Navy1960 is correct and any serious individual who is personally knowledgeable in foreign policy and its history (vs. repeating political talking points from one corner or another), knows this.
 
The Prophet is essentially a graduate student learning on the job. Fine. He is not the first one.

My take on his foreign policy to include defense, is that he is

1: trying counter-propaganda out. It may work here and there and/or at least change the game a bit; and

2: has no defense backup plan. His advisors probably do not see anything apart from all-out war as being remotely feasible, and that is questionable given the current politics and economic situation we find ourselves and the social spending we are talking about.

Navy1960 is correct and any serious individual who is personally knowledgeable in foreign policy and its history (vs. repeating political talking points from one corner or another), knows this.


Did you hear Cheney blame 9-11 on Richard Clark?

The same Dick Clark that sent him a memo 3 days after Bush was sworn in saying, "bin ladin determined to attack...."?

Unless he meant the Dick Clark from New Years Eve & Band Stand? :lol:

You are a sucker. Yes, he's learning on the job. Bush didn't have to learn. Cheney and Rumsfeld worked for Dick Nixon. They knew what they were doing from day one.

And anyone who disagrees doesn't understand the real world, or is only saying the shit they say because they actually do know how politics are played and they are jedi mind fucking us all. The GOP are very clever. Just keep saying Weak on Defense and eventually find a situation that proves your point.

And get hit on 9-11 and flip it so you say, "hey, we haven't been attacked again".

Well Clinton got hit in 92 and never again since. So he did a good job? Sucker.
 

Forum List

Back
Top