Let's go.........RANDOM!

The place to hang out and talk about totally anything general.
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:05 pm

That part I got, what I didn't get was what this was supposed to mean:
Feud wrote:In light of recent events, there's going to be a lot of people who aren't particularly concerned about whether Europe likes Obama's foreign policy right now.


Are you saying people are angry that Obama isn't more aggressive towards it? Are you agreeing with those people? Are you talking about something else?
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:27 pm

That a lot of American's will be less concerned with what other people think of our foreign policy, but rather whether the current policy has caused the problems, and whether it is responded to well.
User avatar
ynbniar
level5
level5
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: Home again...

Postby ynbniar » Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:33 pm

Feud wrote:That a lot of American's will be less concerned with what other people think of our foreign policy, but rather whether the current policy has caused the problems, and whether it is responded to well.


Forgive me I'm just going by general reports but I thought the violence was due to some anti-muslim film - I've not heard anything saying it is related to USA foreign policy?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19584734

:?:
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:35 pm

Libya looks to be a coordinated attack. But, regardless, foreign reaction, and reaction to the reaction, to domestic policy is part of foreign policy.
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:14 pm

Feud wrote:Libya looks to be a coordinated attack.

By whom? Anyone other than the government of some country and it can be dismissed as a small extremist groups.

Feud wrote:But, regardless, foreign reaction, and reaction to the reaction, to domestic policy is part of foreign policy.

And has Obama made any major missteps on that front? From what I gathered he codemned the attacks, paid his respects to the dead, and tried to distance the US government from the movie, which is exactly what he was supposed to do. And given that the government of Lybia itself condemned the attacks there does not appear to be any reasons to place it on poor foreign policy and international relations.
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:59 pm

Xocrates wrote:By whom? Anyone other than the government of some country and it can be dismissed as a small extremist groups.


I haven't heard an exact whom yet. But, it was a three hour gun battle that covered at least three embassy buildings. Ambassador Stevens was killed after his building caught fire from RPG strikes. It wasn't just an angry crowd, it was someone who came to fight.

Xocrates wrote:And has Obama made any major missteps on that front? From what I gathered he codemned the attacks, paid his respects to the dead, and tried to distance the US government from the movie, which is exactly what he was supposed to do. And given that the government of Lybia itself condemned the attacks there does not appear to be any reasons to place it on poor foreign policy and international relations.


That depends on who you ask, many are saying that yes, he has made major missteps.

There's some controversy about how the video was handled: whether it should have been condemned at all and if so, was the condemnation equally leveled at the protestors? As for foreign policy, foreign policy is about more than just what governments due. Many feel that the protests are a result of his foreign policy choices over the last several years, and his response to such are foreign policy choices.

It's a much broader issue then what's happened this week, and what governments do. It's issues that cover years, and deal with not just governments, but how American policy is projected to the world.

*************

Basically: we were successfully attacked on Sept 11th, again, and an ambassador was killed. With Obama only attending less than 40% of his security briefings, and keeping up his campaign schedule, people aren't happy.
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:37 pm

Feud wrote:There's some controversy about how the video was handled: whether it should have been condemned at all and if so, was the condemnation equally leveled at the protestors?

Are people seriously arguing that an openly xenophobic film, which indirectly caused several deaths, shouldn't be condemned?

A more interesting questions is whether the condemnation should be equally leveled at the protesters. The political circumstances and cultural context surrounding the film and the protesters are massively different, it is much easier and much more viable to condemn the film than the protesters, who may feel a lot more justified in their anger than the movie producers.

Feud wrote:As for foreign policy, foreign policy is about more than just what governments due. Many feel that the protests are a result of his foreign policy choices over the last several years, and his response to such are foreign policy choices.

A valid point, although a bizarre position considering his predecessor and his possible successor.

Feud wrote:Basically: we were successfully attacked on Sept 11th, again, and an ambassador was killed. With Obama only attending less than 40% of his security briefings, and keeping up his campaign schedule, people aren't happy.

Again a valid point, and yet I still clearly recall the bush administration basically saying the London and Madrid attacks didn't count. It's hard to see how an attack on a foreign country, which the US has little control over, is somehow worse.
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:45 pm

Xocrates wrote:Are people seriously arguing that an openly xenophobic film, which indirectly caused several deaths, shouldn't be condemned?

A more interesting questions is whether the condemnation should be equally leveled at the protesters. The political circumstances and cultural context surrounding the film and the protesters are massively different, it is much easier and much more viable to condemn the film than the protesters, who may feel a lot more justified in their anger than the movie producers.


Are you seriously saying that someone who says something offensive should be condemned over those who are so intolerant of freedom of expression that they attack embassies, destroy property, and murder people?
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Sep 13, 2012 10:53 pm

Like I said, context matters.

Lybia isn't the US and shouldn't be treated like the US. I'm not saying that what they did wasn't worse than what the filmmakers did, I'm saying the filmmakers should know better while for the protesters it was an open attack on their religion.

Does this justify the protesters actions? No, but they're not the root of the problem.

The filmmakers however, are just plain douchebags.
User avatar
ynbniar
level5
level5
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: Home again...

Postby ynbniar » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:14 pm

Feud wrote:Many feel that the protests are a result of his foreign policy choices over the last several years, and his response to such are foreign policy choices.


Really anyone who says that ill feeling towards the USA & it's foreign policy is limited to Obama's time in office is not of this earth. How about his predecessor, his predecessor's predecessor, etc, etc, etc. I'd say the last decent thing you guys did was join the fight against the Nazi's and their allies, though that all ended when you decided to test your nukes on Japanese citizens.

This is a good example of how utterly fucked up your foreign policy can get when paranoia trumps common sense...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... 93Iraq_war
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:55 am

I don't think anyone has said it is limited to that. Rather, people think that his policies have made the situation worse, that he didn't do enough to prevent the attack, and will judge him on how he reacts to an invasion of a US diplomatic mission and attack upon diplomatic persons.
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:58 am

Out of curiosity, what should (or, for that matter, could) he do to prevent the attacks?
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:09 am

Xocrates wrote:Out of curiosity, what should (or, for that matter, could) he do to prevent the attacks?


Well, attending his security briefings would be a good start.
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:23 am

Obvious question: Did this issue come up in said briefings?
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:35 am

<redacted>

Return to “Introversion Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Paige9 and 14 guests