Skip to main content

View Diary: I'm In. (87 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'll give it a shot (24+ / 0-)

    assuming what you're trying to say is that he's still responsible for "perpetual war" because he didn't end them faster, particularly Afghanistan, and because of the drone strikes in Pakistan on-going.

    a bit hard to parse, but I think that's whay you're saying.

    as one who is a strong pacifist, opposed both wars from the get go, and also hoped he would do more to bring them to a close faster and implement more peace-enhancing rather than war-prolonging policies and as one who I agrees that these wars and the drone strikes and other anti-terrorism policies create more enemies than they subdued in all probability...

    I can still defend the statement.

    "We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war. "

    I agree with that. Don't you?

    I'm one of the people who believes that statement of principle.

    Also too, a lot of people labor under the misguided assumption that Obama can do whatever he wants. like some sort of ominiscient all-powerful demi-god. Believing that, if he does what they want he's a hero. if he does something they hate he's a dictator. some even hold the logically fallacious conception that if he doesn't do what they want, he must be working for the enemy, or willingly serving their interests at least. so therefore what he says is all lies. and he's therefore responsible for the negative impact of policies he hasn't been able to bring to an end. you know by waving his magic wand.

    fact is he's a man with a job. a job with a lot of pressure. pressure no one ever sees. your horse's head in your bed kind of pressure. times a zillion.

    I suspect, and have some pretty good inside info, that most presidents since JFK, (gee why would it start then???), don't have a lot of pull in the military decision-making area. Most they can do is make statements of principle and appeal to public sentiment.

    The fact that he got up and said that statement to their faces, is good enough for me. For now.

    If we want the drone strikes to end I think more of us need to speak up and let them know that. As I recall it took over a decade and millions in the streets nearly every week to get them to end Vietnam. Why should they stop the drones? No one seems to mind much. They make a lot of money on those things.

    What more can Obama do? I don't know, but let's see. He stood up today for everything we believe in. Last time he went with 'lets work together' to the bad guys. Well that sure didn't work. Looks like he's given up on that approach.

    We'll see if he gets tough. We'll see, if so, if that does any good.

    been baby steps before if anything. IMHO today was a giant leap.

    We'll see.

    no man is completely worthless, he can always be used as a bad example.

    by srfRantz on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 05:43:09 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  shoot typos hate when I miss them (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      worldlotus

      copy and paste chunks when editing cause most of them.

      as one who I agrees that these wars and the drone strikes and other anti-terrorism policies create more enemies
      =
      as one who agrees that these wars and the drone strikes and other anti-terrorism policies create more enemies

      I think there was another one but I can't find it now.

      but yeah I'm pissed about the drones too Little.

      gotta take whatever we can get is the short version.
      and keep fighting for more.

      no man is completely worthless, he can always be used as a bad example.

      by srfRantz on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 05:52:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A bit hard to parse? It's pretty straightforward. (0+ / 0-)

      Ai yai yai.

      Let me start with - we here at DKos would have said "Oh, you an't blame Bush!"

      Come the fuck on.

    •  The Obama surge was a disastrous decision. And it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gustynpip, tiggers thotful spot

      was Obama's. He would say that. It was a shocking decision at the time - and what was it for? What have we got in Afghanistan today? A motherfucking mess. And getting worse.

      The drone program - first, it's Obama's. I mean - how dare you? That is hard to even respond to with respect.

      The drone program is a failure beyond comprehension. For us Americans who get to know next to zero about it, and for civilians all over the Middle East. It is a terrorist-creating fiasco. Are we even supposed to belive it's supposed to work? That it's going to get all the bad guys? Some day soon? And it's not, like, perpetual?

      •  And let's not forget the target killing of (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Little, tiggers thotful spot

        civilians that result in the killing of their children and other innocents.

        I have strong hope Obama will be more progressive during his second term than his first and that he'll be a stronger president.  However, I'm not yet willing to overlook all he gave up on during his first term nor his huge failures overseas.

        I support him as I always have, but I'm still not a buyer of the 11th dimensional chess idea.

        "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

        by gustynpip on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 06:16:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  To claim the drone program a failure (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Deep Texan, srfRantz, Quicklund

        Beyond comprehension renders you unworthy of being treated seriously.

        •  trending to same conclusion, different reason (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheDuckManCometh, elginblt

          I agree the drone and other anti-terrorism measures are pretty much failures in that they create more terrorists.

          I was NOT discussing the efficacy of the drone program or any other military decisions.

          I was raising the question of whether or not the president, any president, has direct control over these decisions any more.

          Even Naomi Wolf, as fierce a critic of Obama's policies as anyone, suggested as much in a recent interview, twice, so it wasn't just a slip. sorry don't have the link, couple weeks ago. google it.

          but it was along the lines of, after the usual strong criticism of the drone strikes, guantanamo, middle east policy, NDAA, or something in that area, she added, 'but I'm not sure the president has any real power in this area any more."

          I was frankly stunned. I'd long suspected this. And had several aquaintances, one a former black op, suggest the same.

          and where did I mention Bush responsible for drones?

          and did not mean personal affront to you with the "hard to parse" was referring to my own thick-headedness, and suggesting I may have misunderstood you. and that's why I fed back what I got, as you good commnications skills I'd been taught recommend. I could have worded it better to take responsibility on myself.

          my point restated:

          I'm glad Obama said what he did. Its a great step IMHO.

          no man is completely worthless, he can always be used as a bad example.

          by srfRantz on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 07:21:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  WE have different ideas about democracy, then. (0+ / 0-)

          And about reality.

        •  This is just one facet of the many-faceted (0+ / 0-)

          disaster that is the Obama drone program:

          When it comes to “kill lists,” Obama’s weakness has been to act as though the clarity of his judgment is the same thing as a clear standard; perhaps the thought of losing gave him a sense that this wasn’t the case. But what was most vivid for those in the present Administration, in their vision of President Romney haphazardly dispatching drones? Their distrust of Obama’s successor, or embarrassment about what they might be leaving, unattended to, on the Oval Office desk?
          Just one facet.

          http://www.newyorker.com/...

        •  And this really highlights the "beyond (0+ / 0-)

          comprehension":

          The carve-out would allow the CIA to continue pounding al-Qaeda and Taliban targets for a year or more before the agency is forced to comply with more stringent rules spelled out in a classified document... Among the subjects covered are the process for adding names to kill lists, the legal principles that govern when U.S. citizens can be targeted overseas and the sequence of approvals required when the CIA or U.S. military conducts drone strikes outside war zones.
          But go ahead, Mr. Serious, tell us what the vacuum in your skull is telling you about how great the program is. Because it sure the fuck ain't facts up there.

          http://www.theatlantic.com/...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (154)
  • Community (72)
  • Baltimore (68)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Elections (28)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Education (21)
  • Labor (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Media (19)
  • 2016 (16)
  • Science (16)
  • Politics (15)
  • Environment (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site