“Utter incompetence”? No.
I see you’re still haranguing Mrs. Clinton; do you have any opinions on Mr. Trump?
More specifically, do you have any opinions on Mr. Trump that do not rely on your opinion of Mrs. Clinton for context?
I do not and this is why -
The button prop was stupid and the fact that they failed to use the correct russian word was an embarrassing gaff, nothing more.
As to this:
Reasonable given the drift of relations.
Which can be blamed directly on Clinton because of what exactly? That she neither she nor the president have the ability to control the actions and actors of a nation state with its own set of priorities and ambitions?
What do you propose should be done? Do we start a land war with them? Perhaps escalate to nuclear conflict?
What magical means do you imagine the US has to control non-allied world powers? Do you believe the US to be omnipotent? Should we go to war at the slightest provocation or disagreement or insult? If so, perhaps that’s the reason you support Trump as the candidate in this election.
Would you call it “gaffe”, then?
Yes, I do. Whereas we know that Mrs. Clinton is unqualified to be POTUS , we’re yet to see if we can say the same about Mr. Trump.
Well, we have 2 candidates running for the office here, don’t you think we should compare them with each other?
How about not initiating a reset policy with a country that invades and dismembers our ally?
Perhaps we should have defriended Putin on Facebook instead?
Of course you try to bring the other party to the table to renew/reset relations. Of course you try to solve things through negotiation before resorting to more antagonistic posture and means.
Trump has already been called everything else, might as well go with “traitor” to see if it sticks. It was peculiar seeing sectors of the right writing love letters to Putin in recent years, so it’s not just a quirk with Trump.
I’m still pretty sure Cheney was an Iranian mole.
Perhaps we should not have initiated a reset policy with a country that invaded and dismembered our ally?
Even when the other party invaded and dismembered our ally?
So you’re saying that, if only Clinton had not held a press conference with a prop button, none of this would have happened?
No, I’m saying if only Clinton didn’t initiate reset policy with Russia, after Russia invaded and dismembered our ally, maybe there would not be any doubt now that she’s unqualified to be POTUS.
Speaking of reset, it sounds like maybe you need one?
What would you have wanted her to do?
You can try to talk out your differences, or you can try to fight out your differences–those are pretty much the only options. (Well, I suppose you can ignore them, and allow them to continue to invade and dismember other countries while you give them the cold shoulder, but I don’t consider that a valid choice–do you?)
I’m gonna go with “build a wall and make West Berlin pay for it”.
No, not really. I think when discussing Mrs. Clinton qualifications (or, rather, the obvious lack thereof) to be POTUS, it is important not only to rely on FBI’s investigation, which showed to us that Mrs. Clinton recklessly mishandled highly classified information, and then lied about it to investigators, but also to remember her initiation of disastrous reset policy with Russia.
As one of the posters in this thread said: “Why can’t obviously idiotic policy proposals be shot down”?
There was no one to shut down obviously idiotic reset policy that Mrs. Clinton initiated with Russia, after Russia invaded and dismembered our ally.
What do you propose the US should have done with respect to Russia’s actions in Georgia, as an alternative to trying to open (reset) diplomatic relations?
How as Hillary responsible for subsequent Russian invasion of Ukraine (2014) and bombing in Syria (2016)?
I would have her not initiate a reset policy with someone who just invaded and dismembered our ally.
I propose the US not try to open (reset) diplomatic relations with a country that invaded and dismembered our ally.
And then what?
You keep repeating the same party line despite it being refuted by the director of the FBI in his own words. I don’t know who you expect to convince with factually incorrect arguments but I assure you, it’s not going to work here.
Please do. Which idiotic policies and in what way are they idiotic. Please provide evidence, not personal conjecture.
Once more with feeling… What alternatives do you propose should have been exercised instead?
And then not to reward countries that invade and dismember our allies with initiating “reset” policies with them. The appeasement of that sort usually leads to said countries repeatedly invading and dismembering other countries as well.
For example, when Neville Chamberlain initiated an appeasement policy with Hitler, Hitler subsequently invaded Britain’s ally Poland.
And, of course, when Hillary Clinton initiated reset policy with Putin, Putin subsequently invaded US ally Ukraine.
You’re repeating yourself. You can’t follow up “don’t pursue a reset policy” with “don’t pursue a reset policy”.
It is 2009. You are Secretary of State. What affirmative diplomatic action do you take in regards to Russia?
Just to make it clear: I’m not asking what you won’t do, what policies you wouldn’t adopt, or what you think of Hillary Clinton. I’m asking you what specific policy above and beyond not doing something you would pursue.