Main > Everything Else
'Dubya' isn't "Russian" for diplomacy.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 28, 2005, 01:12:59 am ---You're insinuating something I never said.
--- End quote ---
I'm saying something you clearly wanted to, since that's the best snippet of a "dig" you could come up with.
--- Quote ---it does *not* diminish the fact that it was a direct dig at Bush, on the world stage nonetheless.
--- End quote ---
and days before, Bush was gunning Putin and we got to hear "lookit how he's alienating America from the rest of the world with these tactics".
It was a "dig" simple 'mercans like you and I could have shot down, and demonstrated a third-grade mentality from a "respected" world leader. To 'splain it easier for you, your "point" would have been the same if Putin had stood there and calling Bush a big fat doody head. It sounds ridiculous when I put it that way, yet you can't see it's essentially what Putin was doing.
You demonstrated your belief that he can't be direct, pointed, and honest in speaking with world leaders, and now your "point" that THAT was a "dig" demonstrates that you like third-grade arguments on the world stage. Under no scenario is there a "winnable point" for Bush unless he acts the same way. You want to paint him into a corner, but don't realize that there's a door in the corner. He opened the door (said nothing) and walked away ignoring the point
Expecting us to believe you were pointing out a "dig" on Bush on the world stage, rather than gleeful revelry on your part that a world leader is willing to adopt your tactics IS ignorant.
Spare me your "woodshed" ::)
--- Quote ---That Bush continues to fail so badly at managing diplomacy and exuding leadership, that he'd engender other world leaders to act in the same prepubescent fashion he's prone to behave in. It's sad, sloppy and downright silly.
--- End quote ---
And yet, you can't help but to do the exact same thing in your quest to save America. One wrong, in your mind, brings another wrong from Putin, and brings yet another from you. You won't credit him for doing it his way, you can't give him credit for doing it your way, and he fails (in your mind) no matter what he does. We understand your analysis. Great job at "staying above the fray".
--- Quote ---I don't use the media to gauge the importance of a story. Nor do I allow them to dictate to me what matters. You'd call me ignorant, then propose that CNN/CBS/FOX should guide our lives?
--- End quote ---
You use SOME form of media when gauging the "importance" of a story. This has started to blow over on left-leaning sites, it's started to blow over EVERYWHERE. Nobody said you should allow anyone to "guide your life", I just have a hard time believing you're doing any investigative journalism on your own that doesn't come from SOMEONE else considered "media"...which have dropped the story ::)
--- Quote ---You've already shown that you care so little about anything this administration does or does not do.
--- End quote ---
Either you're ignoring things I've said, or you expect ME to have my life guided by what YOU believe to be important, either way, my earlier point is demonstrated again. Thanks.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 28, 2005, 10:06:25 am ---But much like everything else, Bush goes about it in, what I feel, is a completely unproductive way. Also, just to head off this line from Bsuh defenders, it's not as simple as, "Wah! You damn liburuuuls just hate Bush, and he can never do anything right in your eyes!"...that's a extremely deficient statement and it's totally untrue.
--- End quote ---
Then stop demonstrating that we hit the nail on the head
--- Quote ---What Bush just did to Putin, is like what Drew does to most everyone he disagrees with on this forum, he insults them indirectly by making snide comments about their "ignorance" and/or mental inferiority.
--- End quote ---
I thought your "point" was about Putin getting a "dig" on Bush on the world stage.
--- Quote ---For my part, that's why I've tried to be less pointed by working to eliminate ad hominem attacks.
--- End quote ---
Good on ya...although your body of work paints a different picture ::)
--- Quote ---Do you really think Bush's comments and subsequent behavior are going to effect positive change in Russia's thinking and/or actions? Are they going to compell Putin to want to work w/ the U.S. on any number of very important fronts?
--- End quote ---
They already HAVE effected positive change and demonstrations by Russia of wanting to work with us.
Change is happening all around the world, and MUCH of it for the better, due to Bush's steadfastness and leadership. Just because YOU aren't willing to credit him with any of it doesn't stop it from happening, and therefore, demonstrating that all your hand-wringing is nothing more than a hindrance to actual progress.
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 28, 2005, 10:25:20 am ---Yeah, ignoring those memos was brilliant! Ignoring 52 separate warnings from the FAA about upcoming attacks on America[/url] was brilliant!! No wonder you feel Bush is a success, if this is your measure of brilliance. I see it now, Osama still on the loose is a tremendous boon for our country!!
--- End quote ---
Perhaps you should initiate a letter-writing campaign to the NSA who was offered Osama's head on a silver platter, and given numerous warnings about his capabilities and what he wished to do.
Wait, I made a mistake there. It wasn't an NSA, it was the Pope of Presidents who ignored those things. Again, a demonstration of your willingness to turn a blind eye to the best solution ever offered America and instead blame the man who was at the "end of the chain". Your "point" is blindingly partisan. There are those on your own side who can see and accept this. Why you can't is beyond MANY.
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 28, 2005, 05:26:17 pm ---The war in Iraq is *not* over, so to call it a success or failure at this juncture is premature and jingoist at best. Let's be honest, you believe it *will* be a success, and I believe it will not. I guess I can't argue the case any further if you truly think it's already over and done with.
--- End quote ---
You really can't argue it any further, just like we can't continually point out POSITIVE change and behavior happening in the region as a success to you. We can't see your point, and you can't see ours. At last, something we both agree on!
DrewKaree:
--- Quote ---Republicans like to credit Reagan, but he really did nothing more than outspend the Russians in an attempt to bolster M.A.D. which led the U.S. into a tremendous deficits. His "arms race" played right into the hands of authoritarian "Communist" hard-liners in the Kremlin, which most likely extended the length of time it took for communism to finally fall in Russia, all while edging the dying regime to the brink of war several times.
--- End quote ---
Let me get this straight....he outspent them (DID something), this led right into their hands somehow, and ultimately led to their demise. So you point out that Reagan put into action a plan which led to their demise. Sounds like you made our case for us, and in such a nice concise fashion! Thanks!
--- Quote ---We won the Cold War even before Reagan, to noone's credit, but rather due to inherent flaws in the Russian system.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, I remember all those gas lines, rampant inflation and unemployment, and outrageous military spending under the Carter administration ::) Those "flaws" seemed to be working beautifully until Reagan said "The hell with it, we're going to put the screws to them". Those "flaws" WORKED, until we DID something about it. Your extension of 10 years would have been 20 if Reagan hadn't done what he did.
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on March 01, 2005, 02:43:46 pm ---My beef is with the fringe element that has hijacked the Republican party and whipped their base into such a fanatical frenzy that I see very decent people voting against their own best interests in support of the false premises of a wounded and dying ideology.
--- End quote ---
That you think a "fringe" element could coerce a turnout like the last election is yet another demonstration of how you misunderestimate America.
That you think the "base" of the Republican party is so intellectually soft is another reason for the massive turnout. The American people decided they'd had enough of being talked down to. They said "SHUT UP" in more numbers than those who were pissed off at an "idiot and a chimp".
--- Quote ---Was Barbara Boxer the NSA during the runup and subsequent execution of one of the worst attacks on American soil? Was see privy to the same reports as Condi was?
--- End quote ---
Clinton passed on Osama. 'nuf said.
It never ceases to amaze me how efficient Bush haters are at ignoring the failures of Clinton.
--- Quote ---52 warnings from the FAA during her tenure as NSA. You think it's ok, I think she should be held accountable.
--- End quote ---
GREAT! I'll pick you up so we can both go watch the hearings against WJC when they hold him accountable for allowing the figurehead of Al Qaeda to refine the plot against America that led to 52 warnings from the FAA
Again, we'll disagree until we're blue in the face. We see it one way, you'll continue to use hindsight to micromanage the U.S. Government ::)
--- Quote ---For more recent failures of leadership and diplomacy, here's one of Condi's latest beautiful displays of political prowess:
"CTV News has learned that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada's decision to opt out of the program that she's postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April."
--- End quote ---
I believe, fredster, that stands for MrCTV, since the media doesn't guide his life.
Grasshopper:
I never bought into the idea that Russia was on the verge of collapse in the eighties. Sure the economy was weak by western standards but it wasn't weak by Russian historical standards. Bear in mind literally millions of Russians died of starvation during the Stalin era. The question is not whether the Russian economy was weak but whether the Russian people, and the people in the satellite countries, were on the verge of revolution. I don't think there is any convincing evidence to suggest they were.
I believe the cold war ended primarily because of Gorbachev's bravery and vision, and I don't think he gets enough credit for this in America. Sure Reagan deserves credit for negotiating with him (something that many US presidents would not have done) but essentially Reagan was in the right place at the right time, and took most of the credit.
I always find it irritating when some US commentators brag about how the US 'won' the cold war, firstly because it is untrue, and secondly because this type of mentality helped to undermine Gorbachev. Comments such as these made many Russians feel humiliated. We (the west) should have supported Gorbachev far more than we did, and given Russia substantial economic aid at a crucial time. It would have been in our long term interest.
If we had supported Gorbachev then perhaps the coup against him wouldn't have happened and Russia would have been spared the disastrous Yeltsin presidency where communism was essentially replaced with organised crime, and perhaps we wouldn't now see Putin regressing back to a hard line authoritarianism.
What a wasted opportunity.
fredster:
Yes and NO Grasshopper.
There was a set of conditions that caused the fall. Yugoslavia's move toward capitalism, the weak economy of the USSR, etc. I agree with that. NO doubt.
But the Resolve of Reagan was that we were going to hold the line and make it difficult for the USSR to survive. The moral support the US gave the people inside the walls gave them the boost they need. Reagan kept up the pressure to the disdain of his domestic and european critics. Reagan also kept Russia as isolated and demoralized as he could. It greatly contributed to the fall because it pushed them to use all of their resources where it really didn't benifit them.
Reagan made it clear that the US would support the people, and he did what he said. That was a huge contribution to the fall of communism. Maybe not the Key reason, but one of the top 5 reasons. If we had pandered to them like we have China and supported their economy the communists could have artificially kept that system alive perhaps until today.
Past that, it was up to the people of the USSR to work out thier domestic issues internally. We support the freely elected leaders of countries. It was up to them to decide their leader. After generations of communism, a sort of governmental organized crime, we could hardly expect them to emerge with a perfect system. A large segment of the population was fearful of any other form of government because they were socialized under communism.
Bush has made it clear to Putin he sees the regression. Putin made it clear that the Russians will handle Russia. It wasn't wasted. Putin is doing this as a reaction to the recent terrorist attacks, and he has went too far. Being former KGB he's falling back on his training. After all, I don't think he studied government at Harvard or Yale did he?
There have been tremendous strides for human rights and capitalism in the former USSR. There have been setbacks. But the direction, as Putin himself stated is forward at their own pace. To expect more than that is to hold these people to an impossible standard.
When they do come around, after the old guard has died off, you are going to see a country that could overtake the free world with it's economic power.