Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1165141]So so funny that Russia is now some sort of issue when for most of the Obama presidency, Putin outmaneuvered US interest and Obama personally all over the globe.

Where was the outrage over Crimea, Ukraine, hacking and leaking across the globe, giving Snowden sanctuary, major arms deals with Iran, military action in Syria against US back troops which turned the tide where Assad is winning that war, etc.

???? You were ok with that???[/quote]

You don't have to go back to any of those. From the link that mooby posted. Maybe all titles nowadays should be done like the old Sherman and Peabody cartoons where they had two titles, but in this case one gives the pro-trump slant and one gives the anti-trump slant so it would be

[SIZE="2"]Russia Deploys Missile, Violating Treaty and Challenging Trump [I][SIZE="1"]or[/SIZE][/I] After Ignoring Treaty Ban, Russians Give Last Snub to Obama[/SIZE]

makes for longer titles, but maybe lets readers see more views

[quote]The ground-launched cruise missile at the center of American concerns is one that the Obama administration said in 2014 had been tested in violation of a 1987 treaty that bans American and Russian intermediate-range missiles based on land.

[B]The Obama administration had sought to persuade the Russians to correct the violation while the missile was still in the test phase[/B]. Instead, the Russians have moved ahead with the system, deploying a fully operational unit.[/quote]

This wasn't about challenging Trump, it was about impotent action by Pres Obama's administration for the last 4 years. The line "had sought to persuade" literally has to make you laugh and cry at the same time. It's probably just poor writing, but you can't seek to persuade a bully, well you can but it's usually by giving him a bloody nose, not by reasoned discussion.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1165151]You don't have to go back to any of those. From the link that mooby posted. Maybe all titles nowadays should be done like the old Sherman and Peabody cartoons where they had two titles, but in this case one gives the pro-trump slant and one gives the anti-trump slant so it would be

[SIZE="2"]Russia Deploys Missile, Violating Treaty and Challenging Trump [I][SIZE="1"]or[/SIZE][/I] After Ignoring Treaty Ban, Russians Give Last Snub to Obama[/SIZE]

makes for longer titles, but maybe lets readers see more views



This wasn't about challenging Trump, it was about impotent action by Pres Obama's administration for the last 4 years. The line "had sought to persuade" literally has to make you laugh and cry at the same time. It's probably just poor writing, but you can't seek to persuade a bully, well you can but it's usually by giving him a bloody nose, not by reasoned discussion.[/quote]


Eight years ago I was trying to understand the outcry from the Bush people and being told it's Obama's fault.Now you got what you wanted Trump,I don't give a rats ass if Hillary was worse or Obama did this or that. Trump has had four weeks and he has fucked it up.We need to stop with Obama and Hillary and concentrate on the ass in the office now.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Giantone;1165154]Eight years ago I was trying to understand the outcry from the Bush people and being told it's Obama's fault.Now you got what you wanted Trump,I don't give a rats ass if Hillary was worse or Obama did this or that. Trump has had four weeks and he has fucked it up.We need to stop with Obama and Hillary and concentrate on the ass in the office now.[/quote]

hilarious. The whole article happened before Trump took office. Yes he needs to get a handle on it, but sorry geopolitical standoffs don't resolve the day the US puts a new president in. I will make this promise to the board - by the end of this year, you will not hear me say "Obama left {add subject here} in {add condition here} so it's not Trump's fault". Most likely I will turn to the Republican congress and blame them but after 9 months (randomly chosen time frame less then a year more than 6 months) Trump will certainly bear the burden of what is going on in the country and in the world.

and G1 for you to remain intellectually honest with your expressed statement, I guess that means that, in your eyes, all positive economic news from Jan 20th goes squarely on Trump's positive balance sheet?

Re: What would it take?
 

I need to find the article where this neutral economist predicted that we would definitely see a bit of an economic boom if Trump got elected. He also predicted that if he does proceed with his promises we'll see a sharp drop-off after a year or two. I need to find it. Was a really good article, but some of the stuff was way over my head.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;1165156]I need to find the article where this neutral economist predicted that we would definitely see a bit of an economic boom if Trump got elected. He also predicted that if he does proceed with his promises we'll see a sharp drop-off after a year or two. I need to find it. Was a really good article, but some of the stuff was way over my head.[/quote]

I think its likely we will see a recession soon, because, well, they happen regularly:

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States[/url]

Im thinking if it happens this coming time its gonna be because of China's influence of their own changing economy and how we are depending on cheap consumer goods.

While Im not fully behind Dodd-Frank, it does do some good things...we are more prepared than ever.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1165141]So so funny that Russia is now some sort of issue when for most of the Obama presidency, Putin outmaneuvered US interest and Obama personally all over the globe.

Where was the outrage over Crimea, Ukraine, hacking and leaking across the globe, giving Snowden sanctuary, major arms deals with Iran, military action in Syria against US back troops which turned the tide where Assad is winning that war, etc.

???? You were ok with that???[/quote]



Just curious how you think Putin outmaneuvered Obama and the US? Also, what exactly were you looking for in response to counter these Russian moves?

I keep hearing this repeated so I want a genuine answer.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1165164]Just curious how you think Putin outmaneuvered Obama and the US? Also, what exactly were you looking for in response to counter these Russian moves?

I keep hearing this repeated so I want a genuine answer.[/quote]

You lead. That's how you handle it.

In most case he sat on his hands. Its just funny now why Russia is an issue when before the media and country never questioned anything. Funny how that hypocrisy works.


I listed the above outmaneuvering...Syria and Eastern Europe mostly. But political influence in the Middle east is just shocking. Did you hear, that Turkey is cuddling up with Russia now? Do you know how important Turkey is in that region?

He beat poor Obama down just bout everywhere. There was an world wide ass-kicking tour.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1165165]You lead. That's how you handle it.

In most case he sat on his hands. Its just funny now why Russia is an issue when before the media and country never questioned anything. Funny how that hypocrisy works.


I listed the above outmaneuvering...Syria and Eastern Europe mostly. But political influence in the Middle east is just shocking. Did you hear, that Turkey is cuddling up with Russia now? Do you know how important Turkey is in that region?

He beat poor Obama down just bout everywhere. There was an world wide ass-kicking tour.[/quote]


You straight avoided the answer. I'll ask it again.


In what ways do you think Putin outmaneuvered Obama and the US? Also, what exactly were you looking for in response to counter these Russian moves?

Re: What would it take?
 

Obama definitely had his failings, and maybe I'm totally off-base here, but I think the big concern with Russia is it seems like many parts of the Trump administration have some deep ties with a country that traditionally hasn't been an ally.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1165172]You straight avoided the answer. I'll ask it again.


In what ways do you think Putin outmaneuvered Obama and the US? Also, what exactly were you looking for in response to counter these Russian moves?[/quote]

I thought my response and my previous post were clear. If not, here some folks from your side who actually sum it up nicely:

[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leila-hudson/how-putin-outmaneuvered-o_b_5210426.html]How Putin Outmaneuvered Obama in Syria and Ukraine | The Huffington Post[/url]

This just speaks to Ukraine and Syria.




Like I stated before, this Turkey and Iranian stuff is serious. You remember this?: [url]https://www.wsj.com/articles/turkey-shoots-down-jet-near-syria-border-1448356509[/url]

Now that takes balls....could you imagine shooting down a Russian fighter? And they didn't apologize.....

And now Turkey is at the table with Russia forming bonds and making deals...interesting. Shooting down a plane, making a statement...a serious one and now they are bargaining, forming agendas, policy....

Interesting, huh?

Re: What would it take?
 

[url=http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2017/0105/Russia-and-Turkey-close-ranks.-A-victory-for-Putin]Russia and Turkey close ranks. A victory for Putin? - CSMonitor.com[/url]

The extent to which the US is being vilified across the board [in Turkey], on a whole range of issues, obviously sets the stage for cooperation with the Russians,” says Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington.

“From the macro-geopolitical point of view, this is obviously a victory for Russia,” says Mr. Aliriza, noting the “very clear” significance of a US and NATO ally cooperating so closely with Russia. “Within the region, it is also a victory for Russia because Turkey changed its policy almost 180 degrees in Syria.”


Outmaneuvering in Turkey...which affects parts of Europe and the Middle East

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1165140]From the article:

Administration officials said the Russians now have two battalions of the prohibited cruise missile. One is still located at Russia’s missile test site at Kapustin Yar in southern Russia near Volgograd. [B]The other was shifted in December from that test site to an operational base elsewhere in the country,[/B] according to a senior official who did not provide further details and requested anonymity to discuss recent intelligence reports about the missile.[/quote]

Fair enough, I am curious to know why the media waited to release the article. Certainly looks bad on their part trying to blame it on Trump.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1165172]You straight avoided the answer. I'll ask it again.


In what ways do you think Putin outmaneuvered Obama and the US? Also, what exactly were you looking for in response to counter these Russian moves?[/quote]

Using Crimea as an example. Russia physically took over/annexed land of another country that we had a treaty with Ukraine, Russia and us as guarantors. And they hold that land today. I would consider that an example of outmanuevering us.

As for the response, that goes to my thread on economic sanctions. Did we want to create an equivalent to the cuban missile crisis in Russia's backyard? Obviously Pres Obama did not - and I do believe public sentiment backed him in not. But would a different President, say Reagan, have found a pressure point that might have worked.

Here is one that we know Russia doesn't like, and who knows how the events would have played out, but you asked for a counter response other then what we did:

[quote]February 27th, 2014 is when Crimea's parliament was seized. March 1st the US announces in response to instability in the region, and the threat of "unknown actors" seizing Ukrainian warships with suspected cruise missile capabilities, we are moving THAAD anti-ballistic missile technology to Poland, and immediately beginning work on the long delayed abm shield.

The Russians still don't want ABM tech in Poland, and you would have put a risk to Russian goals, without dropping bombs.

Another, much more risky option, would have been blockading Kaliningrad, using the risk to Poland and Lithuania's borders as the rationale. Sure everyone knows it's really about Crimea, but again, diplomacy doesn't only mean that you roll over and let the other countries walk over your interest.[/quote]

Would either of those worked, would they have sparked WW3. I don't know. Depends on how crazy Putin is, but I would bet you Crimea would be part of Ukraine again.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1165165]You lead. That's how you handle it.

In most case he sat on his hands. Its just funny now why Russia is an issue when before the media and country never questioned anything. Funny how that hypocrisy works.


I listed the above outmaneuvering...Syria and Eastern Europe mostly. But political influence in the Middle east is just shocking. Did you hear, that Turkey is cuddling up with Russia now? Do you know how important Turkey is in that region?

He beat poor Obama down just bout everywhere. There was an world wide ass-kicking tour.[/quote]

Chico I agree that the last administration wasn't successful in reigning in Putin's unchecked abuses of power, but that's the problem. How do you successfully convince a dictator to check himself without starting a major war against arguably your biggest rival? Clearly sanctions aren't enough, and now that Trump has eliminated those what do we do now? It seems Trump's answer is to buddy up to Russia and ignore whatever line they want to cross next.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=mooby;1165183]Fair enough, I am curious to know why the media waited to release the article. Certainly looks bad on their part trying to blame it on Trump.[/quote]

Well, what I gathered was that Pres Obama's administration didn't note it in any formal announcements (and I don't know that they should have, but in December there was other news to be focused on...), and someone in NSA felt like now was the time to release it - [tinfoil] probably the same someone who thought Flynn's conversations were media worthy [/tinfoil]

The media, imo, doesn't care whether they look bad, they want as much piled on as they can, and if it's wrong or misleading they can issue a clarification in small print later.