I am talking about the state of USA-Russia relations. Obama has been criticized for:
-appearing weak and indecisive
-not directly responding to Putin’s actions (in Europe, Ukraine, etc.)
-allowing Iraq and Syria to become unstable, thus encouraging Putin’s adventurism
Now, nobody knows what motivates Putin. But he has become increasingly aggressive-send aircraft and ships into Nation (and Swedish airspaces). He has also confronted US Navy ships in the Black sea. The latest was a warning to Sweden (not to join NATO).Now, I know that the USA has done quite a few things that the Putin government doesn’t like-whether these rise to the level of provocation (or not), I don’t know.
At any rate, is Obama’s lack of expertise (in foreign relations) to blame for this, or would Putin have done the same, if John McCain were president?
I get the impression that Putin does think that Obama is impotent, and thus is encouraged to increase the level of confrontation.
When Putin invaded Georgia in 2007, was it because he saw George W. Bush as being weak and unwilling to engage in overseas conflicts?
I think Putin understands:
a) two megalomaniacal psychopaths at odds can destroy the world, and
b) Barrack Obama is not a megalomaniacal psychopath, and
c) Barrack Obama is not sure just how much of a megalomaniacal psychopath Putin is
Ronald Reagan’s principle asset, in my opinion, was that he was quite clearly nuts and just itching for an excuse to launch hell at the USSR. That, at least, was the face he wore and it kept the USSR tense. Mr. Obama has a different look. Whatever anyone may think of him, his hallmark is an almost obsessive resistance to taking bait. Putin may be nuts, but he is certainly a hell of a strategist. Putin deals losing hands, and Obama refuses to play them. That can be interpreted as cowardice, or as wisdom and it’s hard to tell which is accurate because nobody knows for sure what’s going on behind the scenes.
I asked because Putin (while behaving this way) has made no overtly hostile moves against the USA. The Russians are still cooperating with us on the ISS, and we are still using bases in ex-SSRs to supply Afghanistan. And (as far as i know) Russia is keeping tabs on weapons and nuclear fuel sold to Iran.
So I don’t understand what Putin is all aboutbesides being bellicose to Eastern Europe.
The Poles are getting pretty nervous.
How about this:
Putin does not want to confront the US directly because, even if Obama isn’t a belligerent nut we still have plenty of those sorts in Congress to cause trouble. However, Putin does want territory, influence, power, and resources. If he can simply take those in a manner that does not lead to direct conflict with the US he will do so.
Putin knows that there is no resolve to spend American lives on a war against Russia in Ukraine. Wouldn’t matter who was president: Bush, Obama, Clinton, McCain or Romney… there is just no domestic desire to get involved in a war over there. Just like there was no desire to get into a war over South Ossetia. So Putin can do pretty much what he wants knowing that our response will stop at sanctions, diplomatic procedures and that sort of thing.
Full stop. No, the criticism is not valid. “Appearing” ? To who?
There has certainly been much criticism that Obama appears weak. Whether this is valid or not is one of those YMMV situations.
As for destabilizing Iraq, it seems to me that he really doesn’t care much if Iraq crumbles, and if it wouldn’t mean ISIS taking over he wouldn’t care at all.
Speaking of ISIS: Back during the Arab Spring, there was talk from the White House about arming rebels in Libya & Syria to over throw Qadaffi & Assad. They never received legislative approval to launch such a plan. I’ve heard conspiracy theories which speculate that the White House/CIA went ahead and armed the rebels anyway (illegally), and this spectacularly short-sighted decision is what lead to the rise of ISIS :smack:
Countries right next to major powers are within their sphere of influence. That’s power politics 101. Any leader who would send US troops to Ukraine (or worse, Crimea) should be locked up as insane. Sanctions are helping. We’re thinking about stationing armor and supplies in border countries, no troops, as a signal. That sends a very clear signal.
Note that Khruschev did not send Russian troops to Cuba after Bay of Pigs or the Missile Crisis. We did not send troops in to help the Hungarian uprising of 1956. Same deal.
Putin is a fucking psychopath. The criticisms of Obama are, for the most part, political posturings the incessant yammerings of Fox and right-wing talk radio.
Not even remotely valid.
The President of the United States of America is not some magical faerie who can sprinkle fairy dust on the world and make it better. Nor is S/He responsible for everything that happens in the world.
We’ve been too damned involved in every little situation everywhere and we need to stop doing it.
Most of the time, those who say Obama appears weak either don’t offer alternative actions, or what they purpose would make the situation significantly worse.
In the middle east, for the sake of stability in the past, the US either propped up dictators aligned with us or tolerated dictators opposed to us. Now we get to see the alternative. The only solution I’ve heard from critics is from hawks basically putting the US in a permanent state of foreign war and military occupation.
In short, the critics really, really want war. Lots and lots of war.
This is what happens when you pit a former KBG agent against a ‘community organizer’.
The community organizer presides over an improving economy and very high popularity in Europe while the former KGB agent presides over a sinking economy and extreme unpopularity in Europe? Everyone pays attention and productively interacts with the community organizer and his country, while the former KGB agent bangs pots and pans together so the international community will pay attention to his nation as it fades from global-level international relevance?
Handed his ass to him, you did.
Damn straight! We need a former KGB agent of our own to serve as POTUS. Any idea of how to get one? Lately all we’ve had to choose from are a ‘community organizer,’ a ‘Mormon missionary,’ a ‘man who disapproves of torture,’ a ‘chickenhawk who evaded service in Vietnam,’ a ‘man who falls off his bicycle,’ and a few others who clearly won’t do. Even George H. W. Bushki only worked for the CIA, not the real big boys.
(BTW, it’s KGB not KBG…)
I’d argue that, if nothing else, the last few years have demonstrated why propping up dictators in the Middle East was a pretty good idea all along.
Y’ever notice that the left criticizes Republican Presidents for what they do, while the right criticizes Democratic Presidents for how they appear?
I don’t consider them valid. That’s despite the fact that I generally see Obama as weak, indecisive, and generally uninterested when it comes to foreign policy. Russia is probably the the highlight of his administration for effective foreign policy.
While oil costs are low, Putin can’t use oil sales to Europe as his big hammer politically. Low prices also put their economy in a bind. It’s the perfect environment for embargo to work. That’s what we’re doing and it’s hurting. We are also becoming more militarily engaged. We’re assiting our Baltic state allies with planning. We’ve sent trainers to Ukraine to try and help them improve the performance of their military. Training and troop rotations are ongoing in the Baltics. Talks are ongoing to base a heavy Brigade Combat Team’s worth of equipment in Poland. There’s increased naval presence in the Baltic. Some of our other NATO allies are becoming more engaged in training with and in the NATO countries most at risk if things escalated. We’re not just hammering them economically we’re openly taking steps to increase our readiness to defend our NATO allies.
What stronger steps should we take? Declare war on Russia now? Start fighting Ukranian separatists ourself?
I think you hit a key point-Putin has a big problem with low energy prices. And, as the USA becomes a large exporter of oil/gas, this will get worse. But I cannot understand why Putin is bullying Sweden-Sweden has never been anything but neutral 9unless you go back to 1700 or so).