Support NeoGAF

[Kathian]

This is a little like saying you threw your dog out because it wasn't as cute as it looked in the window. You rallied a bunch of military forces and overthrew the current government. It's not really acceptable to then just get bored because things aren't going as well as you'd like.

There was never an agreement for a broader intervention. Maybe Obama should have had talks about what that was before saying he'd get involved.

 

[Buba Big Guns]

Right after Obama’s reversal, Hillary Clinton said privately, “If you say you’re going to strike, you have to strike. There’s no choice.”

This is such a stupid and dangerous mindset. What's the point of being a superpower if you cant afford any flexibility. The world is extremely dynamic...if the calculus is changing why wouldn't you take the time to explore better solutions?

 

[curls]

Trump = ?

Mr Stay Puft Marshmellow Man

A giant, lumbering, gold plated, paranormal monster. Conjured up by disillusioned republicans - but now out of control and wreaking havoc on the political establishment.

 

[theignoramus]

This is such a stupid and dangerous mindset. What's the point of being a superpower if you cant afford any flexibility. The world is extremely dynamic...if the calculus is changing why wouldn't you take the time to explore better solutions?

That is word for word the doctrine of Hillary's "good friend", Henry Kissinger.
Kissinger thinks American credibility, above all else, must be preserved and maintained and that philosophy drove his FP decision making calculus.

 

[F1Fan]

Obama is probably just passing on the message that the US arms industry is putting pressure on him, for the EU countries to spend their 2% to buy US made army equipment.

Poor Obama.

 

[Kadayi]

Now when shit is getting tough, EU is basically letting Ukraine to wallow in the winds..back to Soviet control.

You been living in a bunker or something?

 

[foxtrot3d]

Well, that was a fantastic article, really great read. I doubt the majority of people commenting in this thread actually took time to read the article especially since the title of the thread is a minor point in the entire article. After everything I've just read I have to agree with the President's viewpoint that the Middle East is not of great concern to the U.S. and they we should be pivoting our interests more towards Asia.

I did love the little humorous discussion Goldberg tried to bring up regarding Hobbes and "The Leviathan."

While flying to Kuala Lumpur with the president, I recalled a passing reference he had once made to me about the Hobbesian argument for strong government as an antidote to the unforgiving state of nature. When Obama looks at swathes of the Middle East, Hobbes’s “war of all against all” is what he sees. “I have a recognition that us serving as the Leviathan clamps down and tames some of these impulses,” Obama had said. So I tried to reopen this conversation with an unfortunately prolix question about, among other things, “the Hobbesian notion that people organize themselves into collectives to stave off their supreme fear, which is death.”

Ben Rhodes and Joshua Earnest, the White House spokesman, who were seated on a couch to the side of Obama’s desk on Air Force One, could barely suppress their amusement at my discursiveness. I paused and said, “I bet if I asked that in a press conference my colleagues would just throw me out of the room.”

“I would be really into it,” Obama said, “but everybody else would be rolling their eyes.”

 

[Oriel]

Okay, so the fearless Reagan helped bring about the fall of the USSR, but he also wrecked Latin America and allowed Pakistan to get nukes.

Funny thing about Reagan was how he withdrew forces from Lebanon after hundreds of US and French troops were killed in Beirut by a terror attack and how nothing was said after a Korean plane was shot down by Soviet forces killing a sitting US Congressman. Imagine if Obama had been as silent if the same atrocities happened on his watch today. The GOP controlled Congress would probably try and institute impeachment proceedings.

 

[Fury451]

I kind of see his point on the "free riders" thing. Not entirely sure if I agree, but that's also something I must admit I lack education on in terms of specifics.

The Joker/ISIL comparison is pretty weird though, especially coming from the president. I kind of get it, but also feel like it way oversimplifies the situation, as ISIL seems to have pretty clear goals and reasons (by their standards at least) for their actions.

 

[foxtrot3d]

I kind of see his point on the "free riders" thing. Not entirely sure if I agree, but that's also something I must admit I lack education on in terms of specifics.

The Joker/ISIL comparison is pretty weird though, especially coming from the president. I kind of get it, but also feel like it way oversimplifies the situation, as ISIL seems to have pretty clear goals and reasons (by their standards at least) for their actions.

Everything would make sense if you take the time to read the article.

EDIT;

Let me just offer a small bit of explanation you'd get from reading the article. With regards to ISIS/Joker he's saying how before you had these autocratic regimes like the crime bosses in Gotham, they were bad but there was order. ISIS is the Joker that comes in and blows up this order creating nothing but chaos.

 

[Fury451]

Everything would make sense if you take the time to read the article.

I have, I get the context for what he's saying, and it makes sense to me. Those are just my summary comments on the topic.

 

[Dice]

Wait... Obama kills people all the time, so America isn't Batman in this picture. I'm guessing we're more like Two-face. So who is Batman?

 

[andythinkpad]

....
The definition of free rider excludes China and Putin.

China and Russia are not U.S allies, they are not in an alliance that requires them to put in an equal amount of resources. Obama's problem is that France and UK do not carry their own weight in conflict and expect the U.S to. Without the U.S, Russia can just lay waste of Europe.

Do you even follow world news?

http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com...e-rider-comment-draws-chinese-criticism/?_r=0

 

[foxtrot3d]

I have, I get the context for what he's saying, and it makes sense to me. Those are just my summary comments on the topic.

Ah, I see. Still, I feel he lays out the situation and his comparisons perfectly well in the article.

 

[Yamauchi]

Damn. James Clapper, Obama's director of national intelligence, did not believe the intelligence pointing to Assad's involvement in Ghouta gas attacks was sufficient, and Obama himself believed he was walking into a trap set by American allies or adversaries. Damn.

Is it a coincidence that Turkish-backed jihadists are now gassing the Kurds in Aleppo?

 

[Trojita]

I thought a former president could re run for a 'third term' non consecutively? so say a gap of a terrible term with Trump in charge and then Obaman the dark knight returns to as the hero America deserves (to continue the hilarious analogies in this thread and article)

Just to answer this, you are correct. Presidents are limited to two consecutive terms (FDR is the only one to have managed that).

Nope

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Section

2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states within seven years from the date of its submission to the states by the Congress.

 

[zeemumu]

Free Riders ? What does he mean ?

The UK are notorious Sonic fans.

 

[CyclopsRock]

This is such a stupid and dangerous mindset. What's the point of being a superpower if you cant afford any flexibility. The world is extremely dynamic...if the calculus is changing why wouldn't you take the time to explore better solutions?

I don't think there's anything wrong with that but if you're going into a situation knowing that you might change your mind, you shouldn't start talking about "red lines", no? Generally, a red line is a point beyond which someone or something should not cross. It doesn't really work if, well, maybe, depending on what happens you can cross it.

 

[timetokill]

Glad Obama called out the fact that Europe has long been having their cake and eating it too.

 

[Maxim726X]

Glad Obama called out the fact that Europe has long been having their cake and eating it too.

I thought, even if for a fleeting moment, that France would take a more proactive role after Paris.

Sure did spit a good game.

 

[Yamauchi]

Reading this just makes me so sad. We're going to end up with Hillary or Drumpf after someone as balanced as Obama.

 

[Mr Git]

Yeah, he pretty much destroyed the "Nixon/Kissinger" doctrine that American needs to "get crazy" once in a while to instill fear in its enemies.

The secret war was fucking abhorrent. I've spent a few months in Laos and there's so many live cluster bombs still around. Grim. No rules of engagement either so the old wats are gone. Clean up is extremely slow as basically no money goes into it.

 

[pigeon]

There was never an agreement for a broader intervention. Maybe Obama should have had talks about what that was before saying he'd get involved.

This is a truly breathtaking abdication of responsibility. France and the UK fought for weeks for intervention in Libya to protect their economic interests. They finally managed to convince the Americans.

Now your response is basically "well, that was pretty stupid of you to listen to us."

Okay, fair point? Seems accurate? But doesn't do much for your original argument that Obama has no good reason to be annoyed with UK leadership. It sounds like he has some pretty good reasons to devalue the special relationship!

Europe is only interventionists when the US follows suit. When European NATO bombed Libya it did so only because the US supported it. Same in Mali. In these conflicts the US was instrumental behind the scenes providing much needed intelligence and logisitical support. The transporters used by French forces to get to Mali were provided by the US.

I think that's the point I was making? Europe wants to fight for intervention in Africa and the Middle East, but it doesn't actually have the resources to do so. So they need to convince America to provide materiel and manpower in order to fight those fights.

 

[akira28]

Joker is too sympathetic, Isis is not.

who the fuck sympathizes with the fucking Joker?

 

[web01]

Obama says one thing but always does the opposite.
How could anyone take him seriously, after US involvement in the middle east under his term.

 

[Opto]

who the fuck sympathizes with the fucking Joker?

I guess it depends on the writer of comics at the time. Nolan's Joker? no way

 

[HK-47]

Obama says one thing but always does the opposite.
How could anyone take him seriously, after US involvement in the middle east under his term.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this. I look at the article and I'm not sure what is being referred to.

 

[ShadowSwordmaster]

who the fuck sympathizes with the fucking Joker?

Crazy people?

 

[Elfforkusu]

Only read the first part of this so far, but great article. I'm not a fan of some of Obama's foreign policy tactics (drones, nsa), but I do think his heart and mind are in the right place, and his judgment on individual situations is about as sound as we've had in the presidency for a long, long time.

 

[Optimusdouche]

The NYT recount is really bizarre. They often reinterpreted Obama in a dishonest manner.

In the actual interview, Obama spends a lot of time slamming those who rush to war, and think ISIS is an existential threat, and he slams those who went to the Iraq War. He slams those who fear monger and play up the threat of terrorism.

I really don't think any news organization has done this quite as much as NYT, including Fox News. NYT is THE pro war newspaper. It seems like the main focal point of NYT is about how much terrorism there is, and we have to act, and go to war.

It's just funny, because, obviously, Obama is mostly trashing the likes of the NYT.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Obama endorsing Trump soon.

Trump just said in tonight's debate that the US is doing all the heavy lifting around the world and then doesn't use that as an economic leverage.

 

[Blader]

Well that took me over two hours to read, but what a fantastic piece. I haven't read through the thread but I imagine a lot of the discussion is more about the OP's headline than the article itself, which would be funny given that the "free riders" bit and Batman metaphor make up all of two paragraphs in the whole thing.

Obama says one thing but always does the opposite.
How could anyone take him seriously, after US involvement in the middle east under his term.

whatthehellareyoutalkingaboutwhoareyoutalkingto.gif

 

[Verendus]

Well that took me over two hours to read, but that was a fantastic read. I haven't read through the thread but I imagine a lot of the discussion is more about the OP's headline than the article itself, which would be funny given that the "free riders" bit and Batman metaphor make up all of two paragraphs in the whole thing.



whatthehellareyoutalkingaboutwhoareyoutalkingto.gif

Why are you lying? There's no way that article took you two hours to read. Sure, it's long, but two hours is ridiculous. This is not what Obama would want from you. Truth is also part of the American way.

 

[Anion]

Damn. James Clapper, Obama's director of national intelligence, did not believe the intelligence pointing to Assad's involvement in Ghouta gas attacks was sufficient, and Obama himself believed he was walking into a trap set by American allies or adversaries. Damn.

Is it a coincidence that Turkish-backed jihadists are now gassing the Kurds in Aleppo?

One thing I've learned is that Obama is definitely one of the most clever presidents we have had and will have for a while. So this would not surprise me a the slightest and it has happened in the past in various ways

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Reading this just makes me so sad. We're going to end up with Hillary or Drumpf after someone as balanced as Obama.

Indeed, hillary is a hawk that we really do not need in the current climate, and ofcourse trump is an asshole.

 

[Dice]

“great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle" -Hitlery Clinton

She would have drawn us into full war with Syria, Iran (perhaps instigating them into trying to make nukes), and maybe Russia with these "you have no choice" bullshit excuses. Obama got us the Iran deal and cooperation with Russia against terrorists. Plus, she comes off as stunningly naive about the nobility of the rebels. We had people right here on GAF live reporting from their everyday lives in Damascus. The freedom fighters were perfectly willing to force non-fighting citizens into supporting them, otherwise claiming that they supported Assad and were likewise enemies. It was an incredibly messy situation with these factions and always has been. Just throwing our troops and weapons into the mess doesn't magically make it better.

 

[AlimNassor]

I'm giving Obama the benefit of the doubt. His heart is in the right place but his cabinet and the nature of the US government "force" him to keep the war machine rolling.

 

[GregLombardi]

Obama is too damn good for this country.

He's exactly as good as all those who voted for hope and change were hoping.

And we will miss him.

He'll be revered in a few decades.

 

[theignoramus]

The NYT recount is really bizarre. They often reinterpreted Obama in a dishonest manner.

In the actual interview, Obama spends a lot of time slamming those who rush to war, and think ISIS is an existential threat, and he slams those who went to the Iraq War. He slams those who fear monger and play up the threat of terrorism.

I really don't think any news organization has done this quite as much as NYT, including Fox News. NYT is THE pro war newspaper. It seems like the main focal point of NYT is about how much terrorism there is, and we have to act, and go to war.

It's just funny, because, obviously, Obama is mostly trashing the likes of the NYT.

Well, their journalists (Michael Gordon and Judith Miller) shoddy reporting on the WMDs in Iraq helped George W dupe the country into a war and columnist Thomas Friedman is one of the most thuggish and immoral apologists for state sponsored violence Ive ever read.
And though theyve been better the last 8 years about reporting on the Israel/Palestine conflict, the decades prior to that they were responsible for some embarrassing intellectual acrobatics in defending Israeli human rights violations.
NYT is just as hawkish on FP as any right wing rag, only theyre more dishonest about it because they try to dress up their pro war advocacy in noble, liberal interventionist rhetoric about protecting human rights and spreading American values.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

This is such a stupid and dangerous mindset. What's the point of being a superpower if you cant afford any flexibility. The world is extremely dynamic...if the calculus is changing why wouldn't you take the time to explore better solutions?

Cuz apparently, if you don't follow thru on your actions, the people in the middle east will think you are soft and create havoc. Which is different from the havoc they create when you do follow thru on your actions. George Bush literally caused ISIS. And if Trump is elected, we can draw a direct line between GWB, ISIS and Trump.

I welcome Obama's foreign policy. Unfortunately, most candidates will run right over it, next cycle. Maybe we can push Hillary to Obama's left? Doubt it. I'll miss him and watch his clips on youtube from time to time, like DVD videos of championship seasons.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Ok, article is not just great, it is tremendous. Basically a must read.

Obama has come to a number of dovetailing conclusions about the world, and about America’s role in it. The first is that the Middle East is no longer terribly important to American interests. The second is that even if the Middle East were surpassingly important, there would still be little an American president could do to make it a better place. The third is that the innate American desire to fix the sorts of problems that manifest themselves most drastically in the Middle East inevitably leads to warfare, to the deaths of U.S. soldiers, and to the eventual hemorrhaging of U.S. credibility and power. The fourth is that the world cannot afford to see the diminishment of U.S. power.

 

[DXLelouch153]

so whos Batman?

 

[MisterFalcon]

The second is that even if the Middle East were surpassingly important, there would still be little an American president could do to make it a better place.

Then the Prime Ministers of the UK and France could do even less yet Libya being a mess is their fault for not doing enough. American exceptionalism strikes again !

 

[pigeon]

Then the Prime Ministers of the UK and France could do even less yet Libya being a mess is their fault for not doing enough. American exceptionalism strikes again !

Again, if UK and France had done less enough, Libya would be fine because they wouldn't have fought for a resolution in the Security Council and convinced America to join their planned intervention.

The Libyan action was proposed and rallied entirely by European powers. America was just there to do the actual work.

 

[Dice]

so whos Batman?

The internet?

 

[norinrad]

Hehehehe at this thread. lol even.

 

[TatteredHat]

Great stuff for the most part, but the US hardly has a great track record when it comes to meddling within Latin America, so him saying he would rather focus the country's attention there is somewhat worrying.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Again, if UK and France had done less enough, Libya would be fine because they wouldn't have fought for a resolution in the Security Council and convinced America to join their planned intervention.

'Libya would be fine' once Gadaffi bombed Benghazi into rubble ? Just look at how Syria is doing using that same tactic.

 

[pigeon]

'Libya would be fine' once Gadaffi bombed Benghazi into rubble ? Just look at how Syria is doing using that same tactic.

So...you support the intervention, and you think America should just have intervened and occupied Libya on its own?

Just look how Iraq did using that tactic.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I think there is a good case to be made that Obama badly miscalculated in Syria by only really half-committing to Assad's overthrow, rather than either letting Assad win early and stabilize or getting fully behind the rebels so they could overthrow Assad and establish a functioning government, and allowed ISIS to get more powerful than it ever should have as a result, but I basically agree with him that the U.S. should be trying to build relationships with Asia and South America, not stay tied down in the Middle Eastern morass.