[Allan from Fallbrook]

John: I don’t have the answer to this question, but perhaps you do (and this goes to the question you had regarding my taking Obama’s “legitimacy” at face value): Doesn’t the FBI conduct background checks of Congressmen and Senators?

I would imagine that there is some sort of governmental vetting necessary, especially for those members of Congress and the Senate that sit on Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees and subcommittees.

Wouldn’t someone have bothered to check if Obama is legit? And, I would have to imagine that if this story had legs, the RNC and their hitmen would be all over it. You correctly point out that this would be a nuke for the Dems, and that fact is not lost on the Republicans. If there was a chance that this was correct, then they would have stuck a fork in him weeks ago, right?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

John: I don’t have the answer to this question, but perhaps you do (and this goes to the question you had regarding my taking Obama’s “legitimacy” at face value): Doesn’t the FBI conduct background checks of Congressmen and Senators?

I would imagine that there is some sort of governmental vetting necessary, especially for those members of Congress and the Senate that sit on Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees and subcommittees.

Wouldn’t someone have bothered to check if Obama is legit? And, I would have to imagine that if this story had legs, the RNC and their hitmen would be all over it. You correctly point out that this would be a nuke for the Dems, and that fact is not lost on the Republicans. If there was a chance that this was correct, then they would have stuck a fork in him weeks ago, right?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

John: I don’t have the answer to this question, but perhaps you do (and this goes to the question you had regarding my taking Obama’s “legitimacy” at face value): Doesn’t the FBI conduct background checks of Congressmen and Senators?

I would imagine that there is some sort of governmental vetting necessary, especially for those members of Congress and the Senate that sit on Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees and subcommittees.

Wouldn’t someone have bothered to check if Obama is legit? And, I would have to imagine that if this story had legs, the RNC and their hitmen would be all over it. You correctly point out that this would be a nuke for the Dems, and that fact is not lost on the Republicans. If there was a chance that this was correct, then they would have stuck a fork in him weeks ago, right?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

afx: Except the birth certificate isn’t on certified Hawaiian coconut paper and doesn’t use banana-based ink, which, as everyone familiar with the State of Hawaii knows, makes it a fake.

This lawsuit appears to be nothing other than a last gasp attempt by a Hillary supporter to throw a monkey wrench into the process and hamstring the DNC.

I think Obama’s choice of Biden is political genius. Anyone trying to question his foreign policy chops now has to deal with one of the most experienced operators on the Hill, and of the most adept policy wonks out there when it comes to foreign affairs and policy.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

afx: Except the birth certificate isn’t on certified Hawaiian coconut paper and doesn’t use banana-based ink, which, as everyone familiar with the State of Hawaii knows, makes it a fake.

This lawsuit appears to be nothing other than a last gasp attempt by a Hillary supporter to throw a monkey wrench into the process and hamstring the DNC.

I think Obama’s choice of Biden is political genius. Anyone trying to question his foreign policy chops now has to deal with one of the most experienced operators on the Hill, and of the most adept policy wonks out there when it comes to foreign affairs and policy.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

afx: Except the birth certificate isn’t on certified Hawaiian coconut paper and doesn’t use banana-based ink, which, as everyone familiar with the State of Hawaii knows, makes it a fake.

This lawsuit appears to be nothing other than a last gasp attempt by a Hillary supporter to throw a monkey wrench into the process and hamstring the DNC.

I think Obama’s choice of Biden is political genius. Anyone trying to question his foreign policy chops now has to deal with one of the most experienced operators on the Hill, and of the most adept policy wonks out there when it comes to foreign affairs and policy.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

afx: Except the birth certificate isn’t on certified Hawaiian coconut paper and doesn’t use banana-based ink, which, as everyone familiar with the State of Hawaii knows, makes it a fake.

This lawsuit appears to be nothing other than a last gasp attempt by a Hillary supporter to throw a monkey wrench into the process and hamstring the DNC.

I think Obama’s choice of Biden is political genius. Anyone trying to question his foreign policy chops now has to deal with one of the most experienced operators on the Hill, and of the most adept policy wonks out there when it comes to foreign affairs and policy.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

afx: Except the birth certificate isn’t on certified Hawaiian coconut paper and doesn’t use banana-based ink, which, as everyone familiar with the State of Hawaii knows, makes it a fake.

This lawsuit appears to be nothing other than a last gasp attempt by a Hillary supporter to throw a monkey wrench into the process and hamstring the DNC.

I think Obama’s choice of Biden is political genius. Anyone trying to question his foreign policy chops now has to deal with one of the most experienced operators on the Hill, and of the most adept policy wonks out there when it comes to foreign affairs and policy.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Okay, I’ll give you that one (UNSR 1441). I wasn’t a huge fan of the Iraq War to begin with, and felt that our energies should have focused on Afghanistan, but, now that we’re there, we need to finish this. I have three friends there, including one in Baghdad proper, and the tide has turned (or at least shifted) in-country and that makes what looks like a losing venture less than two years ago possibly winnable.

While I am not for nation-building (other than our own, of course) or empire building (including our own), I do think having a significant presence in that part of the world matters. I think you can juxtapose Russia and Iran and their respective regional ambitions and then look at what, if anything, is in place to check those ambitions. If the US brings the Iraq War to a successful close (and by that I mean autonomous self-government and possibly one that isn’t purely democratic), then Iran has internal issues with their own populace (who will look to Iraq as a possible alternative) that will preclude them from pursuing an openly self-aggrandizing mission in the area.

In contrast, there is no force or group of committed partners in Europe, and that includes NATO, that will do the same regarding Russia. And Putin’s goals are clearly stated and easily understood: He is aggressively putting Russia back into the empire business.

I concur completely on the Europeans. These countries, Germany, Italy, France, Belgium and Spain, are all rich first-world nations and they can carry their own burden. I remember when I was stationed in Germany (1984), the Germans to the north (close to the Red Army and Warsaw Pact forces) loved Americans because of the proximity of the Russians, East Germans and other ComBloc forces and the Germans in the south (well away from them) treated us an army of occupation. Matter of perspective, I suppose.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Okay, I’ll give you that one (UNSR 1441). I wasn’t a huge fan of the Iraq War to begin with, and felt that our energies should have focused on Afghanistan, but, now that we’re there, we need to finish this. I have three friends there, including one in Baghdad proper, and the tide has turned (or at least shifted) in-country and that makes what looks like a losing venture less than two years ago possibly winnable.

While I am not for nation-building (other than our own, of course) or empire building (including our own), I do think having a significant presence in that part of the world matters. I think you can juxtapose Russia and Iran and their respective regional ambitions and then look at what, if anything, is in place to check those ambitions. If the US brings the Iraq War to a successful close (and by that I mean autonomous self-government and possibly one that isn’t purely democratic), then Iran has internal issues with their own populace (who will look to Iraq as a possible alternative) that will preclude them from pursuing an openly self-aggrandizing mission in the area.

In contrast, there is no force or group of committed partners in Europe, and that includes NATO, that will do the same regarding Russia. And Putin’s goals are clearly stated and easily understood: He is aggressively putting Russia back into the empire business.

I concur completely on the Europeans. These countries, Germany, Italy, France, Belgium and Spain, are all rich first-world nations and they can carry their own burden. I remember when I was stationed in Germany (1984), the Germans to the north (close to the Red Army and Warsaw Pact forces) loved Americans because of the proximity of the Russians, East Germans and other ComBloc forces and the Germans in the south (well away from them) treated us an army of occupation. Matter of perspective, I suppose.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Okay, I’ll give you that one (UNSR 1441). I wasn’t a huge fan of the Iraq War to begin with, and felt that our energies should have focused on Afghanistan, but, now that we’re there, we need to finish this. I have three friends there, including one in Baghdad proper, and the tide has turned (or at least shifted) in-country and that makes what looks like a losing venture less than two years ago possibly winnable.

While I am not for nation-building (other than our own, of course) or empire building (including our own), I do think having a significant presence in that part of the world matters. I think you can juxtapose Russia and Iran and their respective regional ambitions and then look at what, if anything, is in place to check those ambitions. If the US brings the Iraq War to a successful close (and by that I mean autonomous self-government and possibly one that isn’t purely democratic), then Iran has internal issues with their own populace (who will look to Iraq as a possible alternative) that will preclude them from pursuing an openly self-aggrandizing mission in the area.

In contrast, there is no force or group of committed partners in Europe, and that includes NATO, that will do the same regarding Russia. And Putin’s goals are clearly stated and easily understood: He is aggressively putting Russia back into the empire business.

I concur completely on the Europeans. These countries, Germany, Italy, France, Belgium and Spain, are all rich first-world nations and they can carry their own burden. I remember when I was stationed in Germany (1984), the Germans to the north (close to the Red Army and Warsaw Pact forces) loved Americans because of the proximity of the Russians, East Germans and other ComBloc forces and the Germans in the south (well away from them) treated us an army of occupation. Matter of perspective, I suppose.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Okay, I’ll give you that one (UNSR 1441). I wasn’t a huge fan of the Iraq War to begin with, and felt that our energies should have focused on Afghanistan, but, now that we’re there, we need to finish this. I have three friends there, including one in Baghdad proper, and the tide has turned (or at least shifted) in-country and that makes what looks like a losing venture less than two years ago possibly winnable.

While I am not for nation-building (other than our own, of course) or empire building (including our own), I do think having a significant presence in that part of the world matters. I think you can juxtapose Russia and Iran and their respective regional ambitions and then look at what, if anything, is in place to check those ambitions. If the US brings the Iraq War to a successful close (and by that I mean autonomous self-government and possibly one that isn’t purely democratic), then Iran has internal issues with their own populace (who will look to Iraq as a possible alternative) that will preclude them from pursuing an openly self-aggrandizing mission in the area.

In contrast, there is no force or group of committed partners in Europe, and that includes NATO, that will do the same regarding Russia. And Putin’s goals are clearly stated and easily understood: He is aggressively putting Russia back into the empire business.

I concur completely on the Europeans. These countries, Germany, Italy, France, Belgium and Spain, are all rich first-world nations and they can carry their own burden. I remember when I was stationed in Germany (1984), the Germans to the north (close to the Red Army and Warsaw Pact forces) loved Americans because of the proximity of the Russians, East Germans and other ComBloc forces and the Germans in the south (well away from them) treated us an army of occupation. Matter of perspective, I suppose.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Okay, I’ll give you that one (UNSR 1441). I wasn’t a huge fan of the Iraq War to begin with, and felt that our energies should have focused on Afghanistan, but, now that we’re there, we need to finish this. I have three friends there, including one in Baghdad proper, and the tide has turned (or at least shifted) in-country and that makes what looks like a losing venture less than two years ago possibly winnable.

While I am not for nation-building (other than our own, of course) or empire building (including our own), I do think having a significant presence in that part of the world matters. I think you can juxtapose Russia and Iran and their respective regional ambitions and then look at what, if anything, is in place to check those ambitions. If the US brings the Iraq War to a successful close (and by that I mean autonomous self-government and possibly one that isn’t purely democratic), then Iran has internal issues with their own populace (who will look to Iraq as a possible alternative) that will preclude them from pursuing an openly self-aggrandizing mission in the area.

In contrast, there is no force or group of committed partners in Europe, and that includes NATO, that will do the same regarding Russia. And Putin’s goals are clearly stated and easily understood: He is aggressively putting Russia back into the empire business.

I concur completely on the Europeans. These countries, Germany, Italy, France, Belgium and Spain, are all rich first-world nations and they can carry their own burden. I remember when I was stationed in Germany (1984), the Germans to the north (close to the Red Army and Warsaw Pact forces) loved Americans because of the proximity of the Russians, East Germans and other ComBloc forces and the Germans in the south (well away from them) treated us an army of occupation. Matter of perspective, I suppose.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Again, I’m not proposing anything, relative to an American intervention. Bush definitely diddled the dog on this one, and largely because he gave Georgia the impression that we would back them and then whiffed when Putin called his bluff and invaded.

That being said, the Russians are clearly exploiting a situation here, as evidenced by their using South Ossetia and Abkhazia as stalking horses for a larger expansionist policy. The fact that Russia was handing out Russian passports to members of both nationalities right up until a few weeks before the invasion, as well as the fact that Russia has been arming the more extemist elements of both speaks to some level of premeditation on Putin’s part.

And for those of you conflating Russia’s invasion of a sovereign nation (Georgia) that was dealing with two breakaways within it’s internationally recognized borders with our invasion of Iraq: Get real. We were enforcing UNSR 1441, which contained clear and irrevocable language regarding the use of force against Saddam. As to Afghanistan, we were invoking the right of self defense and the intel and subsequent events there justify that action beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Saying that we lack the “moral authority” to question Russia is a convenient cop out, and one the Europeans are using at present, hence my mention of the deafening silence of Germany and Italy.

The Europeans lack not only the military force to oppose Russia’s imperial designs, but they lack the will and cojones also. Putin knows how far to push this, and he has a two powerful weapons at his disposal: Russian control of a large chunk of the European energy market and European cowardice in the face of a determined foe.

We don’t have to go back to 1938 for an example; Spain’s collapse in the wake of the railroad bombings is very illustrative of the current timidity displayed by the Europeans and NATO and the UN as well. Russia’s bullying over Zimbabwe shows, in a clear cut example of supporting a murdering despotic ruler, how quickly we’ve returned to the bad old days of the Cold War.

Yeah, Russia is loaded with Moral Authority. That’s probably what they named the invasion of Georgia.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

JordanT: Again, I’m not proposing anything, relative to an American intervention. Bush definitely diddled the dog on this one, and largely because he gave Georgia the impression that we would back them and then whiffed when Putin called his bluff and invaded.

That being said, the Russians are clearly exploiting a situation here, as evidenced by their using South Ossetia and Abkhazia as stalking horses for a larger expansionist policy. The fact that Russia was handing out Russian passports to members of both nationalities right up until a few weeks before the invasion, as well as the fact that Russia has been arming the more extemist elements of both speaks to some level of premeditation on Putin’s part.

And for those of you conflating Russia’s invasion of a sovereign nation (Georgia) that was dealing with two breakaways within it’s internationally recognized borders with our invasion of Iraq: Get real. We were enforcing UNSR 1441, which contained clear and irrevocable language regarding the use of force against Saddam. As to Afghanistan, we were invoking the right of self defense and the intel and subsequent events there justify that action beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Saying that we lack the “moral authority” to question Russia is a convenient cop out, and one the Europeans are using at present, hence my mention of the deafening silence of Germany and Italy.

The Europeans lack not only the military force to oppose Russia’s imperial designs, but they lack the will and cojones also. Putin knows how far to push this, and he has a two powerful weapons at his disposal: Russian control of a large chunk of the European energy market and European cowardice in the face of a determined foe.

We don’t have to go back to 1938 for an example; Spain’s collapse in the wake of the railroad bombings is very illustrative of the current timidity displayed by the Europeans and NATO and the UN as well. Russia’s bullying over Zimbabwe shows, in a clear cut example of supporting a murdering despotic ruler, how quickly we’ve returned to the bad old days of the Cold War.

Yeah, Russia is loaded with Moral Authority. That’s probably what they named the invasion of Georgia.

[Author]

Posts