Published: Wednesday, Sept. 19 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
Guessing? Apparently you haven't read the news.I'd much rather have a President who isn't sending us to war than a
President like Bush/Romney who want to invade every single country in the ME
shoot first and ask questions later. We quite honestly, have had
enough nation building for one decade, thanks to Iraq and Afghanistan. We
can't afford "Republican" Charity and Foreign Policy anymore.
I'm betting that the US STATE DEPT is also guessing as to what Obama's
intentions are. It's hard to give confidence in your foreign policy when
you don't have one. Always leading from behind Barack.
hey but look at the upside .... Barack might have been MIA with these recent
events in the middle east but he did make appearances in Vegas and the Letterman
show!! Priorities priorities.... It sure would be nice to actually have
something other than an empty suit in the White House.
Mr. Obama would rather be president of the world than the US. After all,
we're nothing special. Since we have no accomplishments that the government
has not permitted, the rewards for our individual efforts belong to the state.
Just imagine what he could do by raising our taxes and giving the salafist
Egyptians more foreign aid. They would love us to death, literally.
re:The Real MaverickTake a long hard look around and ask yourself
how close the US is to war with Iran once they get their nuke and threaten
Israel. What will OBama do? Run to the UN? Give a speech? No one respects Obama
- no one!! Also the Muslim Brotherhood just loves us soooo much don't they.
Yes the ones burning our flag and shouting death to America all over Egypt.. and
after we give them their 2 billion every year in aid. The great unifier Obama
has become the weak appeaser and the entire middle east is now in flames of hate
and rage against the US as a result... oh and Israel is on its own. So much for
apology and appeasement. Peace through strength - both JFK and Reagan followed
that policy and I'll take that any day over a president who spends most of
his week days on Entertainment Tonight or the Letterman show and has no clue
what is going on in the middle east.
Where in the constitution does it say I need to pay for the defense of Israel?
It doesn't, therefore the entire idea is unconstitutional.
Guessing? This must be neo-con talk to build up support for another war in the
Middle East. Now Iran is in their cross-hairs as they beat the drum for another
ill-conceived, unfunded conflict which will take more American lives so the
neo-cons can "stand proud" as defenders of freedom and democracy.Apparently diplomacy is not first in their toolkit for foreign policy.
Perhaps this is why they shout so loud about Obama's "failure".
They prefer shoot first and whip out the credit card. Remember, Romney was a
fervent supporter of the Vietnam War as long as he wasn't in it. Just like
Cheney, Bush, and the whole network of neo-cons who lead us blindly into
Afganistan and Iraq.
re:Mad HatterWar's start because of weakness not because of
strength. That is lesson #1. Those who hate us will never start anything UNLESS
they think we are weak - like we are right now. If they conclude that our
president has no back bone and has basically thrown Israel under the bus - which
he has - then THAT is the time to worry about war my friend! Iran isn't
stupid and they don't have a death wish either. Iran does feel however that
Obama is a do-nothing speech giver which he is and POWER is all they understand.
Any predator becomes increasingly bold and daring if it senses a weakness in
it's prey. Once again I repeat the policy of John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan
- PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH!!! We were successful in the Cuban Missile Crisis and
the Cold War because of that doctrine. Now contrast that to the Iran hostage
nightmare conducted by Jimmy Carter. Carter and Obama are pretty much the same
type of appeasing leaders.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments