Obama's Foreign Relations

[Enigma]

Obviously you don't understand the nuances of foreign relations.

Oh, but obviously you do!

The world hates a solitary know-it-all, Aramike.

And, Dowly, you nailed it.

[CaptainHaplo]

Aramike isn't solitary - I am a know it all too - just we seem to know it all differently. Your comment to him - The world hates a solitary know-it-all - is rather a know-it-all statement as well - and one that I would point out is in error as your implying he is solitary - and I have confirmed he isn't.

Honestly Enigma - its ok that your and Aramike or anyone else disagrees - but is there a reason you have to resort to immature little put downs and insults instead of debating facts? I hate to sound so "republican" - but in this case you seem to prove an oft quoted statement - democrats/liberals can't argue on facts, if you face them with some they instead turn to personal attacks and belittlement instead of discussion. I guess thats the new meaning of "inclusive" and "tolerance" - your included and tolerated as long as you don't disagree with the liberal view, otherwise your demeaned and belittled instead of beaten in the "arena of ideas"

And for the record - I don't agree with "modern" republicans on alot of things - this point however I think your proving Enigma.

Also - having debated Aramike on foreign policy - he isn't without some knowledge. While he and I disagree, his views had demonstrated a familiarity of the subject that the "average" US citizen does not have. You may also have such knowledge - and if so - I encourage you to debate the points vs your current tactic.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Aramike isn't solitary - I am a know it all too - just we seem to know it all differently. Your comment to him - The world hates a solitary know-it-all - is rather a know-it-all statement as well - and one that I would point out is in error as your implying he is solitary - and I have confirmed he isn't.

Honestly Enigma - its ok that your and Aramike or anyone else disagrees - but is there a reason you have to resort to immature little put downs and insults instead of debating facts? I hate to sound so "republican" - but in this case you seem to prove an oft quoted statement - democrats/liberals can't argue on facts, if you face them with some they instead turn to personal attacks and belittlement instead of discussion. I guess thats the new meaning of "inclusive" and "tolerance" - your included and tolerated as long as you don't disagree with the liberal view, otherwise your demeaned and belittled instead of beaten in the "arena of ideas"

And for the record - I don't agree with "modern" republicans on alot of things - this point however I think your proving Enigma.

Also - having debated Aramike on foreign policy - he isn't without some knowledge. While he and I disagree, his views had demonstrated a familiarity of the subject that the "average" US citizen does not have. You may also have such knowledge - and if so - I encourage you to debate the points vs your current tactic.

Very succint. Kudos.

[Zachstar]

This is news?

Last time I checked nobody was getting ready to fire nukes over this so it is a non issue.

But another chance to attack the President as the dream is for him to fail.

[Thomen]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

This is news?

Last time I checked nobody was getting ready to fire nukes over this so it is a non issue.

But another chance to attack the President as the dream is for him to fail.

Apparently it is. While it may not directly involve Obama, it may throw a bad light on him and all Americans, because he picked the people in his administration.

Here is another one.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_clinton_gaffes_odd

He picked the people in his administration, and as such, it is his responsibility. Unfortunately.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

This is news?

Last time I checked nobody was getting ready to fire nukes over this so it is a non issue.

But another chance to attack the President as the dream is for him to fail.

First of all, "getting ready to fire nukes" is a terrible idea for an indicator of what constitutes an issue.

Secondly, foreign policy decorum errors ARE news. But the New York Times thinks Obama's graying hair is more news-worthy.

[Freiwillige]

So, I could have told you that Clinton is not the brightest star in the sky. But you cannot spell Clinton without the sickle and hammer

[August]

I said when Obama appointed her that it was a move to get her out of her powerful seat in the US Senate and into a position where he can fire her. If she keeps giving him ammunition like this that won't be long in coming.