"Arab Spring" One of the Worst Foreign Policy Blunders in History (leader, economic)

[Strel]

Originally Posted by RCCCB

All according to the OBAMA plan.

How's that plan going?

I guess taking out AQ leaders is just a smoke screen for Obama's insidious true agenda, eh?

You guys are just ridiculous.

[Neuling]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Yeah, of course you don't;


An Open Letter From Iranians TO The World-Spread it World Wide - YouTube

Iranian protester pleads for U.S., world to intervene – American Morning - CNN.com Blogs

Course, I imagine its hard when phones, internet are shut down by an oppressive government.

There is no civil war in Iran yet. That video looks more like OWS riots
There is no acute situation like there was in Libya.

Nor would the West take on China, where there have also been massive human rights violations.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by RCCCB

All according to the OBAMA plan.

Playing now on the Tin-Foil Conspiracy Channel...........................

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by sanrene

OMG, I think we've heard it all now. As long as "boots on the ground" are not involved, we can't deem it an invasion.

Words have meanings.

Well then, by your logic, we should be bombing the heck out of Syria and Iran, right?

I think I mentioned the word "opportunity" a couple of times previously.

What effect could be expected from bombing Syria? Not a lot. There's no opposition controlling ground.

What effect could be expected from bombing Iran? A heckuva lot of problems and $8 gas.

What was the effect of bombing Libya's army? Regime change.

See the difference? Nah, you probably don't.

The problem with your logic is that it is 180 degrees from what your logic used to be under a republican president.

Sweetheart, while I wasn't a big fan of the Iraq no-fly zones, I never ever called their enforcement "invasion", and neither did anyone else. However, once the troops landed, that was an invasion. It really is a fairly well-defined term.

No matter that we took sides in a civil war.........that USED to be a no-no for the Left...I wonder what in the world changed.

Remember Bosnia? Another civil war handled by adept use of air power and a minimal loss of allied lives. (And accompanied, of course, by moans and wails from the Republicans.)

The colossal strawman you've built and named "The Left" doesn't exist, of course. Most people are quite happy with intelligent use of armed power as part of foreign policy.

So...now that we determine the goalposts have not only been moved off the field but thrown over the cliff for the Left

In your mind, perhaps.

........we are left with the RESULTS of this disastrous foreign policy of this administration, that helped usher in a radical islamist arab spring.

This is undeniable.

That remains to be seen. The again, backing Mubarak would have been akin to backing the Shah, and did you like that outcome? I suspect not.

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

Still unclear on the concept of "invasion"?

Yeah, totally confused on the Left's 180 of advocating when and where to "invade" a sovereign muslim country.

Surely even you have to admit that obama, who posited the MB would NOT come to power, was dead wrong.

Just stop with the NOTinvasion meme.

Most people are quite happy with intelligent use of armed power as part of foreign policy.

Oh yeah, we're just starting to get the results coming in from all that "smart power" of obama's aren't we?

An even MORE radicalized ME, likely WAR between Israel and her neighbors, alienation of out allies, appeasement (thats not working) of our enemies.

[Neuling]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Yeah, totally confused on the Left's 180 of advocating when and where to "invade" a sovereign muslim country.

Surely even you have to admit that obama, who posited the MB would NOT come to power, was dead wrong.

Just stop with the NOTinvasion meme.

What exactly have the MB done or said so far that makes you think Mubarak was any better?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Yeah, totally confused on the Left's 180 of advocating when and where to "invade" a sovereign muslim country.

Perhaps if you were to learn the meaning of 'invade' and 'invasion' your confusion would be lessened, then again, maybe not

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by Neuling

There is no civil war in Iran yet. That video looks more like OWS riots
There is no acute situation like there was in Libya.

Nor would the West take on China, where there have also been massive human rights violations.

That's because the Iranian regime brutally CRUSHED the protesters. Surely you remember the bloodbath on the street of Tehran in 2009?

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Yeah, totally confused on the Left's 180 of advocating when and where to "invade" a sovereign muslim country.

Like I said, "The Left" is a construction in your mind only.

Surely even you have to admit that obama, who posited the MB would NOT come to power, was dead wrong.

I don't recall him saying that. but I'm sure there'll be a quote for that.

Just stop with the NOTinvasion meme.

Words have meanings and air attacks are not invasions. Unless you want to argue that the Blitz was a German invasion of London, because we'll need to rewrite a heckuva lot of history.

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

Like I said, "The Left" is a construction in your mind only.

Hardly. They are real, dangerous and thankfully a FRINGE of society.

I don't recall him saying that. but I'm sure there'll be a quote for that.

Why, of course you don't;

Words have meanings and air attacks are not invasions. Unless you want to argue that the Blitz was a German invasion of London, because we'll need to rewrite a heckuva lot of history.

Amazing, simply amazing. Just like the semantical obama-speak claiming that his action in Libya was not "war" and did not require congressional authority...another 180 about face by the Left to explain away and excuse this president's actions.