Syria: Putin Schools Obama

[Burn-E]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?_r=0

Saw the NY Times op-ed by Putin and just had to shake my head. Now I don't support sending a few cruise missiles in Assad's direction unless there's a clear objective. And I don't think we have a dog in the fight other than the usual concerns of Israel and oil - for which I'm of the opinion this still falls in the bailiwick of letting them sort it out among themselves.

And I actually appreciate that reflection rather than single minded action has its place. But Obama has just fumbled US foreign policy and the power of the Presidency over the last several weeks in a manner that is has not been matched for decades. Nothing like watching a President make things up as he goes along, on TV, with everyone watching. Sausage making indeed.

And Putin has just given the President a hard lesson of how the big boys play realpolitik.

[Zappo]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/opinion/ghitis-putin-hypocrisy/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

Can't believe I am agreeing with this guy.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2013/09/12/crossfire-gingrich-putin-rant.cnn&hpt=hp_c2&from_homepage=yes#/video/us/2013/09/12/crossfire-gingrich-putin-rant.cnn

[Ihatespeedbumps]

But Obama has just fumbled US foreign policy and the power of the Presidency over the last several weeks in a manner that is has not been matched for decades.

You do remember when Bush II invaded Iraq for supposed WMD's? Then he turned the whole thing into a "humanitarian crisis" because the shit was a sham and he needed to justify spending absurd amounts of money and human life to justify to the American people that "we need to free the Iraqis from an oppressive dictator" How people bought into this bullshit I will never understand.

IMO that is fumbling US foreign policy and power that was previously unmatched. For purposes of a lively debate we'll neglect how it nearly plunged the United States into financial ruin.

I don't necessarily agree with the current President's position, but lets call a spade a spade.

[(n)A-GAME]

I rarely foray into this forum, but have to disagree with you Alain.

Yeah, it would have been better had we brokered a deal like this, and I agree that the President's handling of the whole thing leaves something to be desired. The other side of the coin though is that Syria probably would have come to this junction anyways - with or without Russia - as a last ditch effort to prevent the Tomahawks from raining down. So rather than Putin brokering the deal, Syria would have put the US in exactly the same spot. All of this is to say that Putin probably does not deserve all of the credit you are giving him. He put his face on the deal, so I suppose nice job on the PR front, but this was inevitable.

The real problem is that Obama didn't have the votes in Congress to get a resolution through, which is more demonstrative of how broken Congress is. It's amazing to me how the Republicans continue to stonewall even on issues over which they (and some of their leaders) should not be having an issue with. The Dems never played like this with Bush I or Bush II, and even the Republicans of the 90's never did something like this to Clinton. The contrarianism merely for the sake of opposing the President is really tragic.

[Burn-E]

Actually Daniel, it's not Congress being broken, it's about many of them learning the lesson that the rest of the country learned from Bush's misadventures. To quote Colin Powell, "If you break it you own it." So you better have a damn good plan for what you do and what your follow on steps will be. This is not partisanship for many but instead listening to the will of the people.

Here's the thing though, Obama didn't have to go to Congress for their approval to launch a few missiles. He did it for cover in an effort to be able to place blame on someone else if it all went to shit. At least that's one theory. The other is that he was hoping to find a way out of the mess he placed himself in.

As for total failure in foreign policy with regards to Bush? He may have squandered good will but everyone knew not to screw with him because if you did, Bush would be straightforward in dropping a bomb on you. There's little reason to fear Obama - he can't decide what policy he wants to follow. That's the enormous danger that his dithering created.

[Zappo]

There's little reason to fear Obama

Except drones, which all Republicans seem to fear for some reason.

[ErikS]

Here's the thing though, Obama didn't have to go to Congress for their approval to launch a few missiles.

But he did, so that sends messages abroad.

[Burn-E]

But he did, so that sends messages abroad.

Yes, that he's making it up as he goes along. Which is fine except when you do it live on TV and it's clear you're selling your political allies in Congress short. He's blown a great deal of political capital with this gaffe.

Let's be clear, in foreign policy I only want Obama to be successful. And he's demonstrating how he knows it all and only has yes men working along side him. That's a recipe for disaster.