[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Trump - haresfur - Sep 28, 2023 - 4:29pm
 
RightWingNutZ - haresfur - Sep 28, 2023 - 4:22pm
 
Is there any DOG news out there? - ptooey - Sep 28, 2023 - 3:25pm
 
songs that ROCK! - thisbody - Sep 28, 2023 - 2:11pm
 
Things You Thought Today - thisbody - Sep 28, 2023 - 2:04pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Sep 28, 2023 - 1:19pm
 
New Music - thisbody - Sep 28, 2023 - 12:55pm
 
Science in the News - thisbody - Sep 28, 2023 - 12:48pm
 
nytimes.com/games/connections - Proclivities - Sep 28, 2023 - 11:00am
 
Wordle - daily game - miamizsun - Sep 28, 2023 - 10:46am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Sep 28, 2023 - 10:38am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - miamizsun - Sep 28, 2023 - 10:11am
 
The Obituary Page - Red_Dragon - Sep 28, 2023 - 5:35am
 
Things that piss me off - oldviolin - Sep 27, 2023 - 5:08pm
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - Manbird - Sep 27, 2023 - 2:54pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Sep 27, 2023 - 11:16am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Sep 27, 2023 - 11:10am
 
Song progress bar ? - Steely_D - Sep 27, 2023 - 11:02am
 
Joe Biden - black321 - Sep 27, 2023 - 10:05am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 27, 2023 - 8:12am
 
Way Cool Video - miamizsun - Sep 27, 2023 - 7:43am
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - lily34 - Sep 27, 2023 - 6:16am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Sep 27, 2023 - 5:44am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - rgio - Sep 27, 2023 - 5:14am
 
Free Movie - miamizsun - Sep 26, 2023 - 6:24pm
 
Strange Musical Collaborations - johkir - Sep 26, 2023 - 2:54pm
 
Download Manager IPhone problems - thisbody - Sep 26, 2023 - 10:35am
 
NASA & other news from space - thisbody - Sep 26, 2023 - 10:30am
 
Marijuana: Baked News. - thisbody - Sep 26, 2023 - 10:21am
 
Fox Spews - kurtster - Sep 26, 2023 - 9:07am
 
Comics! - ColdMiser - Sep 26, 2023 - 8:08am
 
Helpful emergency signs - lily34 - Sep 26, 2023 - 7:17am
 
Party planning advice - lily34 - Sep 26, 2023 - 6:08am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Lazy8 - Sep 25, 2023 - 10:46pm
 
New announcer? - William - Sep 25, 2023 - 6:10pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - oldviolin - Sep 25, 2023 - 1:53pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Sep 25, 2023 - 12:04pm
 
Song about digging up bodies to deal with loneliness? - RPnate1 - Sep 25, 2023 - 11:13am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Sep 25, 2023 - 11:11am
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Sep 24, 2023 - 11:30am
 
China - R_P - Sep 24, 2023 - 10:03am
 
Outstanding Covers - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 24, 2023 - 3:21am
 
Stop Making Sense - haresfur - Sep 23, 2023 - 3:42pm
 
Bad Poetry - oldviolin - Sep 23, 2023 - 11:11am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Sep 22, 2023 - 7:47pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 22, 2023 - 11:50am
 
Anti-War - R_P - Sep 22, 2023 - 11:10am
 
Republican Party - Red_Dragon - Sep 22, 2023 - 10:07am
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - GeneP59 - Sep 22, 2023 - 9:41am
 
Tagline thought - oldviolin - Sep 22, 2023 - 8:44am
 
All Dogs Go To Heaven - Dog Pix - oldviolin - Sep 22, 2023 - 7:27am
 
September 2023 Photo Theme - CONTRAST - KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 22, 2023 - 6:32am
 
What's that smell? - Manbird - Sep 21, 2023 - 1:54pm
 
Happy Halloween Yall! - kcar - Sep 21, 2023 - 1:30pm
 
Hi Res 24/96 plan? - mikehd - Sep 21, 2023 - 11:08am
 
Capitalism and Consumerism... now what? - Red_Dragon - Sep 21, 2023 - 9:15am
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - thisbody - Sep 21, 2023 - 8:31am
 
Children and the Future - R_P - Sep 20, 2023 - 7:35pm
 
Unresearched Conspiracy Theories - Red_Dragon - Sep 20, 2023 - 4:56pm
 
Rock Movies/Documentaries - thisbody - Sep 20, 2023 - 11:16am
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - ptooey - Sep 20, 2023 - 6:37am
 
Climate Change - haresfur - Sep 20, 2023 - 12:33am
 
::odd but intriguing:: - Manbird - Sep 19, 2023 - 8:04pm
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Sep 19, 2023 - 7:59pm
 
Good Deals !!! - Steely_D - Sep 19, 2023 - 7:34pm
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - Red_Dragon - Sep 19, 2023 - 4:31pm
 
Plugin RP for Volumio - NeilBlanchard - Sep 19, 2023 - 2:13pm
 
Music Requests - KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 19, 2023 - 5:08am
 
Website Changes - miamizsun - Sep 19, 2023 - 4:31am
 
~ Have a good joke you can post? ~ - DaveInSaoMiguel - Sep 18, 2023 - 2:21pm
 
Nature's Creatures - Beez - Sep 18, 2023 - 10:30am
 
Reviews and Pix from your concerts and shows you couldn't... - oldviolin - Sep 18, 2023 - 9:37am
 
Are you ready for some football? - black321 - Sep 18, 2023 - 8:59am
 
COVID-19 - R_P - Sep 17, 2023 - 2:32pm
 
Movie Recommendation - Steely_D - Sep 17, 2023 - 1:28pm
 
Index » Regional/Local » Europe » Ukraine Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 91, 92, 93 ... 101, 102, 103  Next
Post to this Topic
haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 - 3:59pm

 kurtster wrote:

My main focus has been on Obama's initial reaction and remarks, shortly after the plane was shot down.  It was a take on his first impressions.  As we all know, first impressions matter, a lot.  I stand by my thoughts I have mentioned regarding his first comment.

Having said that, I did find the speech, of which I had only seen some edits until now.  It was a good speech.  It was an appropriate response to the event and the circumstances known at the time of the WH speech.  It was presidential, calm and even reassuring in the sense that he was projecting concern and involvement.  It has satisfied my need to see our POTUS stand up and speak appropriately.

Obama could have avoided a lot of blow back on his initial statement had it been worded and presented a little differently, imho.  He could have easily said that this is an unfolding tragedy (not it may be a terrible tragedy ) and asked for a moment of silence for the victims, before moving on to the rest of his speech that was prepared for the event he was speaking at.  Instead he made his shallow  remarks and kept on going to the rest of his speech without stopping to take a breath.  The blow back is legitimate, again, imo.  Where we go from here, who knows.  I've offered my thoughts on what's next.  I hope that I am wrong, but we'll see.

To rd.  

There are no buts in my words above.  Could someone filled with so much primal hate as you accuse me of made such statements freely and openly ?   I gave credit where credit is due.  Said that it was a good  Said that it satisfied my needs as a citizen of the US to see our President stand up and say the right things.  If Obama does change, I'll let him, in the areas where he does change and be happy for it.  On the areas where he refuses to change, such as the crisis on our border, the IRS and all the rest on the list, I will not hold back.

Lastly on the subject of hate.  What can be said of Obama and all of his supporters who after 6 years in office are still blaming Bush for all that is wrong and failed.  That is 14 years of hate to date.  To those pointing out the hate, while one finger points forward, there are 3 fingers pointing back at the accuser. 

 
Yeah, sometimes presidents are not as articulate as they should be.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 - 9:10am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Yes. He could have. But then he would have been the news rather than commenting on it. At the time, while it was clear what was going on, no official statements had been made. Officially, there was no plane crash. You see the difference? Until there was some verification and not just "reports," and until these reports were verified by someone in an official capacity (a Ukraine government official or an airline flack), it would be irresponsible to verify the downing of a plane. Because not only is it not his news to deliver, it would also tip our hand that we had some inside knowledge of the event. Please stop pretending you don't understand this.

 
I totally disagree with your assessment of the events.

As of at least two and a half hours before Obama made his initial remarks, the crash had been officially acknowledged by the governments of Ukraine and Malaysia.  Obama would not be breaking the news.  It was already official and verified.

See here. 


islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 - 8:59am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Yes. He could have. But then he would have been the news rather than commenting on it. At the time, while it was clear what was going on, no official statements had been made. Officially, there was no plane crash. You see the difference? Until there was some verification and not just "reports," and until these reports were verified by someone in an official capacity (a Ukraine government official or an airline flack), it would be irresponsible to verify the downing of a plane. Because not only is it not his news to deliver, it would also tip our hand that we had some inside knowledge of the event. Please stop pretending you don't understand this.

 
But then he wouldn't have an angle to play on "worst president ever".  Or maybe he would have defaulted to the "why oh why are we getting involved in foreign affairs that don't involve us, our soldiers will die for nothing, why does he hate America so?". Either way I doubt there is a track that he would have failed to ind fault with. 
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 - 8:50am

 kurtster wrote:
Obama could have avoided a lot of blow back on his initial statement had it been worded and presented a little differently, imho.  He could have easily said that this is an unfolding tragedy (not it may be a terrible tragedy
 
Yes. He could have. But then he would have been the news rather than commenting on it. At the time, while it was clear what was going on, no official statements had been made. Officially, there was no plane crash. You see the difference? Until there was some verification and not just "reports," and until these reports were verified by someone in an official capacity (a Ukraine government official or an airline flack), it would be irresponsible to verify the downing of a plane. Because not only is it not his news to deliver, it would also tip our hand that we had some inside knowledge of the event. Please stop pretending you don't understand this.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 - 7:51am

 haresfur wrote:

I just don't get it, Kurt.  Obama, "called the deaths of the 298 people aboard the plane "an outrage of unspeakable proportions." Are you saying that he didn't say this? That he doesn't believe this?

I just listened to the whole press conference from the day after the tragedy on the Washington Post website.  At no time did he say anything different or to make me suspect his motivation.  Furthermore he made it clear that Putin has influence and holds responsibility for the ability of the separatists to shoot down airplanes.  He clearly set out the actions that he considers necessary for the Russians, the separatists and the Ukrainian government to take. Furthermore he made it clear that the US position was that thus far the Russians have not taken necessary actions. He has talked directly to Putin and other leaders involved. My interpretation of his statements is that he is working to move the European governments toward taking a stronger stance with respect to the Russians and the Ukrainian situation (obviously there was some necessary diplomatic wording there).  He also said that it was still early and he didn't want to get out in front of the facts as they come out.

So yeah, he ticked off all the leadership and compassion boxes as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, do you know how long it was between when KAL was shot down and the Reagan speech you posted?
 
My main focus has been on Obama's initial reaction and remarks, shortly after the plane was shot down.  It was a take on his first impressions.  As we all know, first impressions matter, a lot.  I stand by my thoughts I have mentioned regarding his first comment.

Having said that, I did find the speech, of which I had only seen some edits until now.  It was a good speech.  It was an appropriate response to the event and the circumstances known at the time of the WH speech.  It was presidential, calm and even reassuring in the sense that he was projecting concern and involvement.  It has satisfied my need to see our POTUS stand up and speak appropriately.

Obama could have avoided a lot of blow back on his initial statement had it been worded and presented a little differently, imho.  He could have easily said that this is an unfolding tragedy (not it may be a terrible tragedy ) and asked for a moment of silence for the victims, before moving on to the rest of his speech that was prepared for the event he was speaking at.  Instead he made his shallow  remarks and kept on going to the rest of his speech without stopping to take a breath.  The blow back is legitimate, again, imo.  Where we go from here, who knows.  I've offered my thoughts on what's next.  I hope that I am wrong, but we'll see.

To rd.  

There are no buts in my words above.  Could someone filled with so much primal hate as you accuse me of made such statements freely and openly ?   I gave credit where credit is due.  Said that it was a good  Said that it satisfied my needs as a citizen of the US to see our President stand up and say the right things.  If Obama does change, I'll let him, in the areas where he does change and be happy for it.  On the areas where he refuses to change, such as the crisis on our border, the IRS and all the rest on the list, I will not hold back.

Lastly on the subject of hate.  What can be said of Obama and all of his supporters who after 6 years in office are still blaming Bush for all that is wrong and failed.  That is 14 years of hate to date.  To those pointing out the hate, while one finger points forward, there are 3 fingers pointing back at the accuser. 


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 - 6:09am

 haresfur wrote:

I just don't get it, Kurt.  Obama, "called the deaths of the 298 people aboard the plane "an outrage of unspeakable proportions." Are you saying that he didn't say this? That he doesn't believe this?

I just listened to the whole press conference from the day after the tragedy on the Washington Post website.  At no time did he say anything different or to make me suspect his motivation.  Furthermore he made it clear that Putin has influence and holds responsibility for the ability of the separatists to shoot down airplanes.  He clearly set out the actions that he considers necessary for the Russians, the separatists and the Ukrainian government to take. Furthermore he made it clear that the US position was that thus far the Russians have not taken necessary actions. He has talked directly to Putin and other leaders involved. My interpretation of his statements is that he is working to move the European governments toward taking a stronger stance with respect to the Russians and the Ukrainian situation (obviously there was some necessary diplomatic wording there).  He also said that it was still early and he didn't want to get out in front of the facts as they come out.

So yeah, he ticked off all the leadership and compassion boxes as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, do you know how long it was between when KAL was shot down and the Reagan speech you posted?
 
4 days. KAL plane shot down September 1, 1983; Reagan addresses nation on September 5.


haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 11:06pm

 kurtster wrote:

And what if Obama was POTUS during 9/11 and initially said that it "may be a terrible tragedy", instead of calling it a blatant atrocity ?

I guess the point I'm trying to make is the POTUS, whoever he or she is, is the defacto leader of the free world.  As POTUS and leader of the most powerful country on this planet comes the responsibility to react to major events one way or the other in clear terms.  I don't care who shot down the plane or if it was an accident or not, it is still an atrocity.  Firing a weapon of the kind used is in itself no accident.  How hard is it to call it an atrocity and what harm is done if he declares it so ?

As leader of the free world, he has an obligation to state the obvious and call this an atrocity.  Where that leads to isn't determined solely by such a statement, but at least he goes on record and appears confident and plugged in.  The world at large has taken Obama to task over his initial statement.  I am not the only one.

Obama appears to not want to be the leader of the free world in both word and deed.  Am I getting that wrong ? 

I'm not trying to debate whether or not the US should lead the world, but to deal with things the way they are.  I would say presently that the way I see things playing out, Ukraine will be to Obama what the Iran hostage crisis was to Carter.  Nothing will be done until we get a new POTUS, that is if something can still be done.  I agree with your options for Ukraine as there are really few to none.  Putin has the EU over a barrel cuz of oil and nat gas.  It won't stand up to Putin, especially with the winter heating season coming very quickly.  Putin owns Obama after Syria.  Putin ends up with Ukraine or at least the part that he wants.  Its only a matter of time.

Right or wrong, Obama has clearly reduced the role of the US to follower instead of leader.  He has created a power vacuum.  People are taking advantage of the projected weakness and uncertainty and unreliability of the US.  Down the road, Ukraine will be the least of all of our problems.  There are two years left till the 2016 election and two years of a weak lame duck presidency.  All the bad guys have the next two years to do as they please. Who is capable of stopping anyone ?  The way things stand right now, Putin is in charge for the next two years.  These are fascinating and dangerous times to be alive.  Also pretty predictable from here on in.  And I haven't even mentioned the loose cannon, Israel.  ... or China ...

{#Meditate} 

 
I just don't get it, Kurt.  Obama, "called the deaths of the 298 people aboard the plane "an outrage of unspeakable proportions." Are you saying that he didn't say this? That he doesn't believe this?

I just listened to the whole press conference from the day after the tragedy on the Washington Post website.  At no time did he say anything different or to make me suspect his motivation.  Furthermore he made it clear that Putin has influence and holds responsibility for the ability of the separatists to shoot down airplanes.  He clearly set out the actions that he considers necessary for the Russians, the separatists and the Ukrainian government to take. Furthermore he made it clear that the US position was that thus far the Russians have not taken necessary actions. He has talked directly to Putin and other leaders involved. My interpretation of his statements is that he is working to move the European governments toward taking a stronger stance with respect to the Russians and the Ukrainian situation (obviously there was some necessary diplomatic wording there).  He also said that it was still early and he didn't want to get out in front of the facts as they come out.

So yeah, he ticked off all the leadership and compassion boxes as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, do you know how long it was between when KAL was shot down and the Reagan speech you posted?

ScottN

ScottN Avatar

Location: Half inch above the K/T boundary
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 9:38pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
Kurt, your primal hatred of the current occupant of the white house is quite beyond the pale.

it's really quite disturbing. 
Seconded.  What concerns me is that you seem to be a nice guy and all, but you do not recognize your own irrationality towards Obama, and then the poorly considered points that follow your bias. e.g. Comparing the situation of the MH to KAL and Reagan's actions to Obama's. The comparison falls apart on so many obvious points.  And in doing this fool's errand you fail to make any rationally compelling points, imo. In the end you make a mistaken argument and appear foolish in doing so.
Get a grip, man.  Read your own posts to consider RD's point.


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 8:38pm

 haresfur wrote:

As near as I can tell, after listening to this, your main objection to Obama's reaction is that he was more succinct. Reagan's response accomplished nothing - he didn't get any of the actions he was demanding from the SU. That isn't a question of how I regard Reagan, that's a question of the outcome.  It's fair to argue that Reagan's policies had been increasing tension with the SU long before the incident and the US did have a plane in the area so it was appropriate for him to immediately get the facts together on whether that had a part in the tragedy.  That isn't the case for the Ukraine. Personally, I think it is a bit of a joke when any politician makes a big point of canceling a vacation or flying out to see a disaster unless they are actually going to take some concrete action to guide the immediate response - or at least figure out if there is some action they need to take.

The response options in the Ukraine are pretty limited.  A very strong response would possibly lead to a ground invasion by the Russians.  And the European/US response to that would likely be the same as to the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 i.e. nothing.  I think we all agree that Putin is a jerk and using Russian nationalism to increase his position internally.  This may indeed result in a resumption of the cold war. I have some slim hope that he will decide that this bunch aren't worth his trouble.  I also have some slim hope that the Europeans will reverse their hard line economic policies to help bring prosperity to the Ukraine - that probably could have prevented this whole mess and ultimately been cost-effective. 
 

 
And what if Obama was POTUS during 9/11 and initially said that it "may be a terrible tragedy", instead of calling it a blatant atrocity ?

I guess the point I'm trying to make is the POTUS, whoever he or she is, is the defacto leader of the free world.  As POTUS and leader of the most powerful country on this planet comes the responsibility to react to major events one way or the other in clear terms.  I don't care who shot down the plane or if it was an accident or not, it is still an atrocity.  Firing a weapon of the kind used is in itself no accident.  How hard is it to call it an atrocity and what harm is done if he declares it so ?

As leader of the free world, he has an obligation to state the obvious and call this an atrocity.  Where that leads to isn't determined solely by such a statement, but at least he goes on record and appears confident and plugged in.  The world at large has taken Obama to task over his initial statement.  I am not the only one.

Obama appears to not want to be the leader of the free world in both word and deed.  Am I getting that wrong ? 

I'm not trying to debate whether or not the US should lead the world, but to deal with things the way they are.  I would say presently that the way I see things playing out, Ukraine will be to Obama what the Iran hostage crisis was to Carter.  Nothing will be done until we get a new POTUS, that is if something can still be done.  I agree with your options for Ukraine as there are really few to none.  Putin has the EU over a barrel cuz of oil and nat gas.  It won't stand up to Putin, especially with the winter heating season coming very quickly.  Putin owns Obama after Syria.  Putin ends up with Ukraine or at least the part that he wants.  Its only a matter of time.

Right or wrong, Obama has clearly reduced the role of the US to follower instead of leader.  He has created a power vacuum.  People are taking advantage of the projected weakness and uncertainty and unreliability of the US.  Down the road, Ukraine will be the least of all of our problems.  There are two years left till the 2016 election and two years of a weak lame duck presidency.  All the bad guys have the next two years to do as they please. Who is capable of stopping anyone ?  The way things stand right now, Putin is in charge for the next two years.  These are fascinating and dangerous times to be alive.  Also pretty predictable from here on in.  And I haven't even mentioned the loose cannon, Israel.  ... or China ...

{#Meditate} 


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 7:27pm

 kurtster wrote:

I'll just add one more thought that I left out.

Yes, I no longer respect Obama as POTUS.  Respect is earned and lost.  Disrespect does not equal hatred.

Obama has earned my disrespect.  

 

 
I stand by my statement: your posts speak for themselves.
haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 6:44pm

 kurtster wrote:
This is the standard I use for judging Obama ...

I also know that nearly everyone who has participated in this thread the past couple of days holds Reagan in very low regard.

Reagan immediately cancelled his vacation to return to Washington to deal with this head on.  If you actually watch it, pay attention to the 9:50 mark and while watching, remember how primitive our technology was 21 years ago, yet so much was known immediately regarding the incident and was shared as soon as it became available. 
This is a clear and stark contrast to Obama ...  {#Cowboy} 

This is real leadership.

 

 
As near as I can tell, after listening to this, your main objection to Obama's reaction is that he was more succinct. Reagan's response accomplished nothing - he didn't get any of the actions he was demanding from the SU. That isn't a question of how I regard Reagan, that's a question of the outcome.  It's fair to argue that Reagan's policies had been increasing tension with the SU long before the incident and the US did have a plane in the area so it was appropriate for him to immediately get the facts together on whether that had a part in the tragedy.  That isn't the case for the Ukraine. Personally, I think it is a bit of a joke when any politician makes a big point of canceling a vacation or flying out to see a disaster unless they are actually going to take some concrete action to guide the immediate response - or at least figure out if there is some action they need to take.

The response options in the Ukraine are pretty limited.  A very strong response would possibly lead to a ground invasion by the Russians.  And the European/US response to that would likely be the same as to the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 i.e. nothing.  I think we all agree that Putin is a jerk and using Russian nationalism to increase his position internally.  This may indeed result in a resumption of the cold war. I have some slim hope that he will decide that this bunch aren't worth his trouble.  I also have some slim hope that the Europeans will reverse their hard line economic policies to help bring prosperity to the Ukraine - that probably could have prevented this whole mess and ultimately been cost-effective. 
 
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 6:21pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:

Your posts speak for themselves.

 
I'll just add one more thought that I left out.

Yes, I no longer respect Obama as POTUS.  Respect is earned and lost.  Disrespect does not equal hatred.

Obama has earned my disrespect.  

 
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 6:14pm

 kurtster wrote:

That's mighty strong.  I don't hate anyone.  I strongly disagree with people, mostly politicians, yes.  But hate no.

That I repeatedly disagree equals hate ?  How does one talk about politics and current events and not discuss leaders and their roles ?

My bluntness at times is bluntness, not hate.  I will admit disgust but disgust is not hate.  Hate is a personal condition that poison's the mind and body.  It cheapens the value of life and tries to drag everyone and everything down with it.

I didn't shoot down a plane, but I'm talking about it, the players and the circumstances surrounding it. Two thirds of the country believes that Obama is taking this country in the wrong direction.  I recognize the fact that some don't think he is going far enough and others think he is going too far.  But the take away I get is that if you disagree with Obama, the only reason is because of hate.

Just how much of this country actually hates Obama ?  I don't know.  But be sure to know that I could not live with myself if my thoughts were born from hatred.  

Feel free to illustrate examples of my primal hatred.  I will consider your thoughts.  Maybe you're right and someone needs to point it out in no uncertain terms.  This is not a setup for a flame war, just a serious question.

 
Your posts speak for themselves.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 6:07pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
Kurt, your primal hatred of the current occupant of the white house is quite beyond the pale.

it's really quite disturbing. 
 
That's mighty strong.  I don't hate anyone.  I strongly disagree with people, mostly politicians, yes.  But hate no.

That I repeatedly disagree equals hate ?  How does one talk about politics and current events and not discuss leaders and their roles ?

My bluntness at times is bluntness, not hate.  I will admit disgust but disgust is not hate.  Hate is a personal condition that poison's the mind and body.  It cheapens the value of life and tries to drag everyone and everything down with it.

I didn't shoot down a plane, but I'm talking about it, the players and the circumstances surrounding it. Two thirds of the country believes that Obama is taking this country in the wrong direction.  I recognize the fact that some don't think he is going far enough and others think he is going too far.  But the take away I get is that if you disagree with Obama, the only reason is because of hate.

Just how much of this country actually hates Obama ?  I don't know.  But be sure to know that I could not live with myself if my thoughts were born from hatred.  

Feel free to illustrate examples of my primal hatred.  I will consider your thoughts.  Maybe you're right and someone needs to point it out in no uncertain terms.  This is not a setup for a flame war, just a serious question.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 5:29pm

Kurt, your primal hatred of the current occupant of the white house is quite beyond the pale.

it's really quite disturbing. 
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 5:20pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Yeah maybe if one of our current enemies shot down a planeload of people who got on that plane in New York City, Obama would have a reason to stick his nose in. But, as tragic as it is, it doesn't involve us, and our president is doing a decent job of not spouting a bunch of bellicose bluster the only outcome of which would be to "put up or shut up" over a skirmish we want no part of. But I don't know, maybe you do wish for a hot war with Russia. God knows we have a huge healthy military with nothing better to do right now, and we're swimming in budget surpluses that will only go to waste on health care and people and crap if we don't fight fight fight.

 
If the POTUS won't stand up to Putin who will ?

Our Ambassador to the UN said what needed to be said.  But it should have been the POTUS who said it, not a water carrier.  I infer no disrespect to our UN Ambassador.  I am just speaking in terms of roles and hierarchy.

I did see Zep's post while I was on the road today and he made some good points.

One point he raised was the difference between criticism of Obama driven by hate and legitimate criticism of Obama.

I see many attempts to equivocate certain terms with the term hate.  Outrage being one.  Outrage ≠ hate.  Hate is a codified crime.  How does outrage compare ?

What is legitimate criticism of Obama ?  Who is entitled to criticize Obama ?   Based upon the discussions, there doesn't seem to be any or any possible.  All's I have seen are people making excuses for him.

Lead from behind, right ...  What country / leader is going to be stupid enough to stand in front of Obama and believe him when he says I got your back ?

 Again ...  If the POTUS won't stand up to Putin who will ?   Who should ?  Who can ?   

Hint: the UN is not a correct answer.

The US has been totally exposed for what it now is, a feeble, toothless tirebiter on the world stage.   All because of a single plane shot down.  Peace through strength worked well for a long time, better than anything else, at least.  Now the US is about peace through weakness.

I'm not advocating a hot war with Russia at all.  I agree with you, it ain't our problem.  I had to read your comment about our military twice to get it.  Yes our military is worn down and humiliated.  Officers are getting layoff notices in the field during combat.  I'm with Ron Paul, bring our troops home, all of them, and assume a defensive posture on our borders and buy what we need from whoever has it and pay for it, not aim guns at the vendor nor judge them.  They can shoot down any plane but ours.  Shoot down one of ours ?   We'll just nuke you and say better not do it again.  Of course, I exaggerated some things a bit, but I hope you can sort through this and see my drift.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 6:58am

 steeler wrote:
Always true.
 
if only we had semantic precision in the social sciences

{#Good-vibes}
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 6:05am


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 5:23am

 miamizsun wrote:

that depends on how one would define outrage
 
Always true.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 - 5:22am

 steeler wrote:
Obama: "an outrage of unspeakable proportions"

 
that depends on how one would define outrage

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 91, 92, 93 ... 101, 102, 103  Next