Military Cadets Cheer Romney's criticism of Obama

LOL! That's what happens when you see the world as Faux News reports it.

 

Forgive me of taking that with a grain of salt. It is very easy for someone to clam that they were in the service especially online.

 

Interesting, you should indeed visit.

I suspect your cadets, like yourself have little to go on this weakness charge. Its really a baseless charge. We in the UK know it as baseless and therefore I suspect americans are no less informed.

As for cadets, in the UK we seldom make election speeches to them. Because theyre people of no consequence and really theyre too busy preparing for their next exercise.

Lets get one thing straight, Obama is a very very strong military leader. On foreign policy except for licking israels arse again, hes not put one foot wrong. Nor does the world think hes on some big apology trip. Besides in the end whats wrong with apologising sometimes? Doesnt it make you a better man and a more credible political operator?

 

So, we don't know ourselves? You are stretching it. Obama has a few military victories to his credit. Most would give him that. But to say that the cadets or myself are baseless in opinion, well that, coming from an outsider just can't be taken too seriously.

While our cadets are of great consequence, Mitt might have chosen a better venue for his speech. It wasn't like a game show where the applause sign lit up at the appropriate moment. It was a genuine moment.

Knowing when to admit a problem is a good thing. The manner in which you do it given the climate of the country is another. Furthermore, knowing the apology is coming from a far left liberal speaking on behalf of his nation who do not share his views, it is just bad form. The world doesn't see him being on an apology trip? Well, most of us do.

 

I find that hard to believe, what, with Obama stepping on the toes of all our closest allies. Maybe that kind of appeasement goes over well in the UN, Palestine, China, and Russia, but in Canada, Israel, Taiwan, Poland, and Great Britain, it's decidedly unpopular.

 

Proof of this? He sold weapons to Taiwan against China's wishes, and has secretly supplied bunker busters to Israel that the Bush administration did not approve. And he's done nothing to Poland or the UK.

 

Ask and ye shall receive.

U.S. To Deny Taiwan New F-16 Fighters

Canada lost UN seat because it lacked U.S. support: Ex-spokesman

WikiLeaks cables: US agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets

Obama abandons missile defence shield in Europe

And do I honestly have to address the strained relationship between the US and Israel? Obama has treated Israel like dirt.

 

It's the Citadel. I'd almost guarantee the majority are conservative. I'd also say it's a moot point. I don't know whether you've ever been in the military or not, it doesn't matter for my point. I was in the Army and participated in way too many of these "Dog and Pony" shows with politicians, cabinet members and the media. When you attend one of these, you are a body filling a seat and little else. You hear something you might agree with, you clap. Most just go along with the clapping.

Yes. I think Obama is a weak military leader. Strong military leaders don't take secondary roles against the likes of Libya. Strong military leaders don't apologize for the perceived wrongs of their country. Strong military leaders don't alienate their allies, no matter where they may be found.

I will give Obama credit for two things: Listening to his generals on the ground in Afghanistan and increasing troop strength there and putting Petraeus in charge of the CIA. I think the latter will pay huge dividends in the future.

 

Thanks for the sources. For whatever it's worth, I respect you a lot more. A lot of people will walk away when you ask for sources. Now to address them:

Considering our position with China, this is a difficult choice to make. Supplying fighters is pretty extreme on the scale of arms sales, compared with ammunition or vehicles.

We owe China a lot of money and they are a huge trade partner. We are allies with Taiwan, but they are hardly our best friends. I would likely make the same decision in the scenario, though I respect both positions.

The problem with this is the idea that the US has the obligation to "campaign" for a nation trying to get on the Security Council. I don't see that it does.

Furthermore, you should read and evaluate it yourself from a conservative point of view. Canada is very liberal and prone to supporting Palestine and other endeavors in the UN that the US doesn't necessarily support. If Canada was allowed on, it would give the US someone else to try and deal with on the SC. Being a liberal, I would prefer Canada on there to lend another liberal voice to the mix. I would think that you and other Republicans would prefer Canada stay off. Considering Obama has relatively hawkish and conservative foreign policy views, it makes sense that he would also take this approach.

This is a legitimate complaint. You need to consider that the "secrets" were only information on a type of missile that the US had supplied, so it is information related to us as well. We can share that information. The article name implies we took intelligence from Britain that was none of our business and spread it around.

So the offense is small, but still an offense. I would never offer that without consulting with the UK first and getting their approval. I see it as underhanded to do otherwise, so we're in agreement. That being said, in terms of international relations, it was a good move. It is a strong bargaining chip and the UK is a strong enough ally to stand with us regardless of an act like that. So it makes sense to use it to get what you want. That is sorta how foreign policy works.

I would consider the Bush Doctrine far worse in terms of how we treat our allies. During those years we pressured Britain to join us in a horribly misguided war, and used our special relationship as a way to force them into supporting it. It strained every bit of our relationship and resulted in the death of British soldiers. That's far worse in my opinion.

It is my understanding that the missile shield put us at risk for another arms race with Russia, which sounds like a horrible idea.

Furthermore, the President went with a mobile missile defense plan that military officials have said is far more agile, adaptable, and overall better. I don't see this as a snubbing of our allies; instead it keeps them from being badgered by Russia, plus enhances everyone's missile safety.

And yes, you do need to address this, because Obama has done nothing to Israel. If anything, Israel gave the US the big "(*)(*)(*)(*) you" by announcing those settlements with Biden in town; that's a huge insult.

Furthermore, Obama has ordered strict military and intelligence cooperation on anything and everything Israel wants, and sold them quite a few weapons. The difference is that he doesn't parade it around as a political point. He just does it because it's the right thing to do.

I have not heard Obama say or do anything outside of the realm of reason.

 

I think he showed great strength by not jumping into Libya when it isn't our place. Libya is directly south of Europe. It is the responsibility of France and the United Kingdom to handle these sorts of missions. Furthermore, the US did that vast majority of the bombings anyways. We definitely played the primary military role beyond a shadow of a doubt, but Obama stepped back and let others take the political spotlight. So basically he did all the work and took little of the credit. That's called humility, which is a form of strength.

I agree with you on those two points, especially about Petraeus. Smart guy.

 

They were merely being polite.

 

Nothing to Poland? He gave into the Russians by scrapping the missile shield in Eastern Europe in a time when the Eastern Europeans strongly supported America as allies.

 

I don't see that as anything but a gift to Poland. Sure, they were willing to take the facilities in their country, but that doesn't mean they want to. It would mean that Russia has some pretty big missiles pointed right at them for the rest of the history of nuclear weapons...which is going to be a couple hundred more years or so at least.

 

No, you americans do know. Most americans know Obamas foreign policy record is so far pretty good by any standard you could name.

I can say its baseless for the simple reason that when it comes to foreign policy you have little better insight than I. You only advantage re America is in regard to its internal conditions culture and history. On US foreign policy I know as much if not more than you as to what its been up to.

No they may indeed be of consequence in the future as officers, as of now they are just exuberant young men. These young men are simply not knowledgable enough to be taken seriously. Besides, if they were british theyd be working on soldiery, not listening to political speeches by opposition candidates.

US history is not a problem, its in the past. A past that must be faced up to with courage.
The Blair government apologised for slavery and the empire a few years ago. No one gives a (*)(*)(*)(*) that we did, in fact many of us agree.

But your apology is coming not from a far left liberal, but the man elected president with a solid mandate to speak for the USA. He wasnt elected on a sliver majority. And besides how many of you need to agree with him for him to be able to speak for you? 40% 60% 80% 100%??

And no hes not on an apology trip, the world doesnt think it and neither do most americans. I watch alot of US TV, including Fox and the daily show and thats not really even the big impression of him in the States.

 

Why do you guys just make things up like that?

Hes not stepped on anyones toes.

Hes still wildly popular in the UK. His next visit will be another smash hit. The last president you sent over here we needed extra police around to prevent a riot.

Hes not done anything to us except help us in Libya and send in extra troops to Afghanistan and get OBL too. This has taken the pressure off us somewhat for which we are grateful.

 

No, you americans do know. Most americans know Obamas foreign policy record is so far pretty good by any standard you could name.

I can say its baseless for the simple reason that when it comes to foreign policy you have little better insight than I. You only advantage re America is in regard to its internal conditions culture and history. On US foreign policy I know as much if not more than you as to what its been up to.

No they may indeed be of consequence in the future as officers, as of now they are just exuberant young men. These young men are simply not knowledgable enough to be taken seriously. Besides, if they were british theyd be working on soldiery, not listening to political speeches by opposition candidates.

US history is not a problem, its in the past. A past that must be faced up to with courage.
The Blair government apologised for slavery and the empire a few years ago. No one gives a (*)(*)(*)(*) that we did, in fact many of us agree.

But your apology is coming not from a far left liberal, but the man elected president with a solid mandate to speak for the USA. He wasnt elected on a sliver majority. And besides how many of you need to agree with him for him to be able to speak for you? 40% 60% 80% 100%??

And no hes not on an apology trip, the world doesnt think it and neither do most americans. I watch alot of US TV, including Fox and the daily show and thats not really even the big impression of him in the States.

 

I think you've made a really good point here. The "apology" tour is anything but, really. He's not apologizing for the country as much as he is saying "Look, this is how we've been doing things for the past few years and it's going to be different under my administration."

And even if it was a straight up apology, I wouldn't call it unwarranted. "Look, our last guy? Yeah, I know. Words cannot express. But we're going to try and turn that around. Sorry for all of the dead citizens and the (*)(*)(*)(*)ed economy and whatnot. Our bad. We're turning it around, I promise."