Obama: There can be; there will be peace in our time

The Coffee Shop
1

This has to be right up there with the best example of why those who are not ready for prime time should not be running for President. I guess four years in the IL State Senate wasn’t quite enough to groom Obama to lead the free world. From last night’s debate:

Question: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since. In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
Obama took the question first. He replied,
*Obama: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them – which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration – is ridiculous. Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.*He later went on to say:

“It is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them” and that one of his first diplomatic initiatives would be to “send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they’re going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses.”

Chamberlin’s trip and his announcement of peace in our time was wildly applauded at the time, though it didn’t turn out so well. Maybe Obama didn’t get a history class in his school in Indonesia or wherever. Pardon me if I don’t rest easy with the assurance the Iran and Syria will have been told what their responsibilities are once Obama has executed the plan that results in the collapse of Iraq.

I am no fan of Mrs. Clinton, but she responded like and adult, even if all it amounted to was a promise to unleash our diplomats on them:

Well, I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous diplomatic effort because I think it is not that you promise a meeting at that high a level before you know what the intentions are. I don’t want to be used for propaganda purposes. I don’t want to make a situation even worse. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy, which has been turned into a bad word by this administration. And I will purse very vigorous diplomacy.
*And I will use a lot of high-level presidential envoys to test the waters, to feel the way. But certainly, we’re not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and, you know, the president of North Korea, Iran and Syria until we know better what the way forward would be.*Obama is such a joke. Adult supervision needed.

2

He’s a joke because he advocates a foreign policy approach that you don’t agree with?

3

This was the example I was alluding to in my assessment (POTUS thread) of the their relative experience shining through last night; idealism versus idealistic realism. It wasn’t lost on the audience, either.

4

I don’t see how anything resembling a foreign policy is to found in that statement.

Adult supervision was quickly provided by his adviser in the spin room who assured us that Obama’s statement didn’t mean that such meetings would actually happen.

I don’t like Mrs. Clinton at all, but the lady knows what it means to be President of the United States. It means you don’t grovel to tin horn dictators. Richardson probably knows that too, but the rest of the field isn’t ready for prime time.

5

I am doing way too much pimping of Mrs. Clinton here, but I have to agree with her characterization today of Obama’s comments:

“I thought that was irresponsible and frankly naive.”

6

Was Obama was brought up in the most populated Muslim country in the world? Boy if the best candidate available is hard-assed, sour faced disgruntled Hilary …

7

but the rest of the field isn’t ready for prime time.

Do you feel the same of Biden?

8

Oh…and I agree with you on Obama…lots of personality, but not experienced enough. I’m tired of elections being won on personality.

9

“Do you feel the same of Biden?”

Fair enough. He is an adult as well. He at least has a plan for Iraq, alone among the Democratic candidates as far as I can tell. I believe his plan is awful, but at least he has a plan he is willing to articulate. In the last debate he took a pass on pandering to the left wing wackos, so he deserves credit for that.

10

It seems there’s no spinning or damage control involved. He’s standing by his statement and taking aim:

"Obama told NBC News it’s obvious that the diplomatic spade work must be done before any such meeting. But he wants to change Bush administration policies that freeze out enemies and move to a principle that says the United States should talk with everybody.

“The notion that I was somehow going to be inviting them over for tea next week without having initial envoys meet is ridiculous,” he said in an interview outside his Senate office. "But the general principle is one that I think Senator Clinton is wrong on, and that is if we are laying out preconditions that prevent us from speaking frankly to these folks, then we are continuing with Bush-Cheney policies.

“I think what is irresponsible and naive is to have authorized a war without asking how we were going to get out,” Obama said. “And you know, I think Senator Clinton hasn’t fully answered that issue.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072501959.html

11

I believe his plan is awful, but at least he has a plan he is willing to articulate.

His plan may be a pipe dream…as much as it is a pipe dream to just magicaly create democracy in the region, but I’m curious what it is you hate about it.

12

Partitioning Iraq is impossible. Sunni and Shites live together in large numbers and even intermarry. There is no place to draw a line absent a program of massive ethnic cleansing. I haven’t heard Biden call for that. If we create a Kurdistan, Turkey will probably invade it.

It would be nice if such a dog would hunt, but that is just not going to happen.

13

** Was Obama was brought up in the most populated Muslim country in the world**?

Wasn’t australia a British penal colony?

14

Personally, I would see partition as returning Iraq to its roots. It was a completely arbitrary mish-mash of ethnic and religious groups at its founding. Clearly, the risk of sectarian/ethnic violence may rise at first. With that said, we already face some of those risks and there has been a lot of internal displacement amongst the various groups already. To me, the biggest obstacle would be making such that the Sunnis are not let in poverty given that their tribal areas are not located near the oil fields…

15

I don’t think much of Biden’s plan. I don’t think it would work. I do give him credit though. He is not an idiot and the plan can certainly be defended. He also gets credit for telling the wackos that no matter what, getting out of Iraq will take a lot of time.

If I don’t stop this, my defense of Mrs. Clinton, Richardson and Biden is going to wind up in somebody’s signature line.

16

It looks like you are right about Obama’s standing by his statement:

“I’m not afraid to lose the P.R. war to dictators,” Obama said in a speech in Concord, New Hampshire Thursday, where he picked up an early Granite State endorsement from first-term Democratic Congressman Paul Hodes. “I’m happy to look them in the eyes and say what needs to be said… I don’t want Bush-Cheney Light.”

He is OK with losing the PR war to dictators. He is proactively in favor of losing the war in Iraq as rapidly as possible. Is there any war he wants to win other than his election to high office?

I am quite certain that the dictators will take him up on his kind offer should he gain the Oval office.

How did that Pelosi trip to Assad in Syria work out? Has Syria stopped causing trouble in Lebanon and Iraq? I haven’t heard about such a development, but maybe I missed it.

17

“I’m not afraid to lose the P.R. war to dictators,” Obama said in a speech in Concord, New Hampshire Thursday

Ugh. Someone needs to tell him to stop digging already. What a stupid thing to say.

18

No word yet on what it is that “needs to be said” to Assad and company.

Do you think our crack media will ask?

19

How did that Pelosi trip to Assad in Syria work out? Has Syria stopped causing trouble in Lebanon and Iraq? I haven’t heard about such a development, but maybe I missed it.

Actually, I don’t know how it worked out. I wouldn’t expect any progress or change to have come from it, but aside from highlighting the rift between members of our government (which should have surprised no-one), did this actually do any damage to our foreign policy? What did we lose, or what did they gain, from her visit to Syria?

20

aside from highlighting the rift between members of our government (which should have surprised no-one), did this actually do any damage to our foreign policy?

Umm . . . It used to be considered kind of important to present a relatively unified front, internationally. Yes, her visit did damage.