"A new strategy for a new world": Obama lays out his foreign policy
By SilentPatriot Wednesday Jul 16, 2008 8:45am
During a speech Tuesday in Washington, D.C., Barack Obama laid out his vision for America's role in the world, focusing specifically on Iraq and Afghanistan.
"George Bush and John McCain don’t have a strategy for success in Iraq – they have a strategy for staying in Iraq. They said we couldn’t leave when violence was up, and they now say we can’t leave when violence is down. They refuse to press the Iraqis to make tough choices, and they label any timetable to redeploy our troops 'surrender,' even though we would be turning Iraq over to a sovereign Iraqi government – not to a terrorist enemy."
You can read the entire transcript here. You can also read Senator Obama's New York Times op-ed here.
Login or Register to post comments.
What the world really needs is a five or ten year break from the United States; a little breather so people can unwind and take it easy for a while without worrying that their wedding party will be vaporized in blast of napalm or that their brother-in-law will be dragged off to some CIA hellhole where his eyes are gouged out and his fingernails ripped off.
Lets declare victory and get the hell out and let the Iraqis sort out thier future.
1] Immediate withdrawal
2] Formal apology
3] Reparations
4] War crimes trials
I agree
Spot on, Walrus.
Using diplomacy in Iran and the warmongering has stopped to lower oil prices.
Withdrawing troops from Iraq and increasing in Afghanistan.
Is w using Obama's positions?
meanwhile, back at home, I will continue to sell out our country to special interests such as telecom companies and the disaster economists to get elected just like they do.
Why do people on the Right see the Islamic Republic as irrational? They play by a rational playbook, IMHO, and have more than enough times shown the understanding of politics one would expect from a regime in its position. They are probably financing terrorism in Iraq, but hell, if I was the Ayatollah, I'd do it as well, as it's a tempting excuse to get rid of the True Believers and humiliate a too-big-for-its-britches hyperpower at the same time while strengthening my position in a nation that had fought an 8-year-war with me 20 years ago. Iran is rational, and I'm not so sure that applies to the Bush Administration's policies for dealing with them. Obama at least would try to strengthen the dialogue, McPapen'd go in guns blazing.
I like how he addresses the constant "surrender" meme that the Repulsicans love to throw out. However, the media will not pick this up and run with it. The real issue is how do you say the same thing in such a way that it gets more airtime and is repeated ad nauseum by the blockheads on the "news" shows?
It might also be worth noting on that fiasco with Jesse and Obama that someone at FOX leaked Jackson also was heard using the N word.
Fox News: Jesse used n-word
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1060833,CST-NWS-jesse17.article
What did Angry O'rpheus has to say? "Fox News' Bill O'Reilly said a "weasel" at Fox leaked the full quote to an Internet site."
Duhh umm it's kinda hard to read all them words and stuff. He don't seem like the kinda guy I wanna have a beer with and stuff. He thinks hes to good to say sumthin cool like "bring em on!" I bet he dont even got a flite suit.
goldenjoe @ 7:
So, vote for the other guy. After all, the only difference is that one's a Democrat and the other is a Republican.
Obama talking points:
McSame/Bush Bush McSame
Old as in “The same old solutions that do not and are not working.” Old and useless ideas.” “Same old economic/health plans.” “Man, McSame is old!”
“Confused” “Confusing” “Doesn’t Understand” “Not in tune” “Out of touch with…”
“Flip flop”
McSame/Bush/ McSame/Bush/ McSame/Bush/ McSame/Bush/ McSame/Bush/ McSame/Bush
I'm sorry to say there are too many peons in this country help real change occur, these peons will always pop their stupid heads up from their holes all the time to screw it up. Change will only come out of dire necessity.
Does that imply that these here straights are not dire?
VegasRage @ 14:
Change comes one of two ways: mass discontent and the ballot, or mass discontent and the bullet. So far the US has avoided using the bullet that often, and may we continue to do so now.
I want to cry; the comparison of the Eloquent, intelligent, thoughtful Obama; to a bush or mcain; is like John Fitzgerald Kennedy compared to homer simpson or chuckles the clown. Bush likes to boast about being a C student; I betcha he was an E student but cheated.
VegasRage @ 10:
Big frikken deal, there are plenty of people in America that say the n-word. I just said it 5 times right now. The fact remains that when speaking within similar groups, people will talk differently. Men speak differently when around women, Christians speak different when outside of Church, Comic book geeks speak . . . well maybe not them, but you see it happens everywhere. This particular time it happened on camera while mic'ed. Get over it. Why don't we watch that video of GWB hurling on the Japanese Prime Minister instead.
how inspirational.
a guy that votes to fund illegal wars is ready to declare them victorious.
Arrest Rove @ 17:
JFK does not deserved to be remembered as anything other than a crippled Cold Warrior responsible for clusterfucking what could have worked differently with Cuba and for spiking up an already growing enlistment in Vietnam. The Bay of Pigs occurred on his watch, and he was responsible not for lessening Cold War paranoia, but for damn near starting WWIII with the Soviet Despot over fucking Cuba. That ratty-ass Caribbean island wasn't worth threatening to spark a nuclear war over.
Obama might well be transcending the politics of fear. JFK and all Cold War presidents excelled in them.
Anyone thinking Obama's not about imperialism
read his homeboy/top foreign policy adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski's book: the grand chessboard
here's a nice juicy cutlet:
"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)
more lovely dollops of change can be found here: http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard
enjoy your new world order folks.
"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
Obama's top foreign policy adviser,
Zbigniew Brzezinski
sounds like PNAC huh?
heehaw @ 22:
heehaw @ 21:
Oh, yes, Brezinski, the genius who armed the Salafis and would start the process leading up to Al-Qaeda. Fuck, now the Dems are gonna try something even dumber than what Rove did.
Brezinski around Obama is about as comforting as Stormfronters around McPapen.
jeff @ 2:
Not until we get the oil fields. Why don't they just say that?
Arrest Rove @ 17:
Mc894of899 likes to boast as well. Look at the target audience. They are appealing to stupid people (aka bitters) who make it a point to dislike smart people (aka elitists)
heehaw @ 21:
I wouldn't be too worried, With the Euro so high, European companies are buying American property and corporations at fire sale values... and the EU together with the Chinese and Japanese control a significant part of our gov debt.
It will be interesting to see how Mr. Brzezinski copes to the fact that he will be Eurasia's bitch and not the other way around.
The new world order may not necessarily imply American hegemony. The sense of entitlement by ignoramuses like Mr. Brzezinski never ceases to amuse me.
If only eloquence was in direct correlation with honesty, good will, vision, strength and intelligence ......... alas I think not, as I just watch a some what well spoken speech, that towed the same old same old ......... and america goes forward with it's jingoistic sabre rattling and flag pins.
L.A. Confidential @ 1:
Can you make that 50 to 100 and the rest of the world is allowed to deport americans during that time as well.
L.A. Confidential @ 1:
Um, one question: does the fact that US agriculture sustains a minimum of 40% of the global population factor into this somehow?
The Dude @ 27:
More so Asia, though Europe is getting in on the deal for a laugh I think, so when the time comes and tables are turned they can be a part of fucking over the US, just as the US has done to the rest of the world for so long.
The sense of entitlement that is pervasive throughout the whole north american society is a large part of the issue I think, I don't think i've lived any where in the world where so many people think they deserve so much for so little, most other places I've been people have this alien trait to this place, known as humility and thankfulness.
What is it that the meek inherit again .........
The Dude @ 27:
Again, Brezinski drew the Soviets into Afghanistan and started to arm the Mujahideen. One Hanbali Mujahid group would later become Al-Qaeda. Given that precedent, having him around another inexperienced candidate is scary as all hell.
Big Red Will @ 12:
"When you choose the lesser of two evils, you are still choosing evil" - Jerry Garcia
Can't you think beyond the dichotomous carrot on a stick? I want my vote to be my vote, mean something for me and not be a sell out. I don't want to throw it away on a "lesser of two evils".
So I will probably write in Jerry Garcia figuring a dead guy can't sell us out and the secret service can no longer harass him. I do not think that would be throwing away my vote. Instead I think that would be truly voting how I want and about what I think and feel is right for the country.
I don't have to buy into the dichotomy paradigm and neither does anyone else. Once we realize that together and stop sending our money to these buffoons, we just might actually have a true progressive voice rather than a "steal your choice".
Ok so he says "As President, I will pursue a tough, smart and principled national security strategy – one that recognizes that we have interests not just in Baghdad, but in Kandahar and Karachi, in Tokyo and London, in Beijing and Berlin. I will focus this strategy on five goals essential to making America safer: ending the war in Iraq responsibly; finishing the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban; securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states; achieving true energy security; and rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21st century"
Why do we have interests in Kandahar, Karachi, Tokyo, London, Beijing, and Berlin in terms of national security? We don't need any US troops or bases in those countries. Finishing the fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban? This is impossible unless you are willing to kill every single Afghani man in the country. Securing nuclear weapons and materials from "terrorists" and "rogue states?" Who gives him the right to decide who is a rogue state or not- does this mean he will secure the nuclear weapons Israel has?
Then he says
"After this redeployment, we’ll keep a residual force to perform specific missions in Iraq: targeting any remnants of al Qaeda; protecting our service members and diplomats; and training and supporting Iraq’s Security Forces, so long as the Iraqis make political progress."
Why do we need to keep a residual force in Iraq to target ANYONE? why do we need to keep throwing money to train Iraqi's security forces? I didn't ask for my tax dollars to do that. How about Obama and whoever else agrees can fund Iraq's security forces with their own money? He says it would be better than Iraqi's are supported by the Iraqi dinar but still wants to throw $2 billion more into some "international effort".
"In fact – as should have been apparent to President Bush and Senator McCain – the central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was. That’s why the second goal of my new strategy will be taking the fight to al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
So now we see the truth- Obama is not about ending WAR- he is about ending the IRAQ war and intensifying the war against the people in Afghanistan and Pakistan- not understanding that we have absolutely no right to be in those countries. 9/11 is no excuse- all the ones who commited that act are dead and none were Afghan or Pakistanis.
Moreover, lasting security will only come if we heed Marshall’s lesson, and help Afghans grow their economy from the bottom up. That’s why I’ve proposed an additional $1 billion in non-military assistance each year, with meaningful safeguards to prevent corruption and to make sure investments are made – not just in Kabul – but out in Afghanistan’s provinces.
Is this $1 billion of Obama's money each year? Of course not- he like Bush and the others have decided to use American citizen's money for their own desires. Is there an "opt-out" program where if I don't want my money going to Afghanistan I can get a tax break?
"The greatest threat to that security lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train and insurgents strike into Afghanistan. We cannot tolerate a terrorist sanctuary, and as President, I won’t. We need a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO to secure the border, to take out terrorist camps, and to crack down on cross-border insurgents. We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region. And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights."
Truly disgusting- we need more troops, helicopters, satellites, and more predator drones to kill people that have crude technology and live in poorly built houses or even caves? How many more Afghan or Pakistani civilians will die because of THIS WAR-MONGERING? I am not giving Obama a clear pass on this issue just because of his stance of possible withdrawal from Iraq. If Pakistan cannot or will not act we will take out high-level targets? What gives us the right to use military force on their soil? How about if Iran decided to take out "high-level targets" in the whitehouse who have been threatening them with possible war? How would we react?
"That’s why I’m cosponsoring a bill with Joe Biden and Richard Lugar to triple non-military aid to the Pakistani people and to sustain it for a decade, while ensuring that the military assistance we do provide is used to take the fight to the Taliban and al Qaeda.
More american money going to a foreign nation. Of course- the United States doesn't actually have any money since we are bankrupt so we will be forced to borrow money from the chinese/saudis or print more money to fund this massive amount of financial aid. And that leads to lowering the value of the dollar and the living standards of ALL AMERICANS.
"We will pursue this diplomacy with no illusions about the Iranian regime. Instead, we will present a clear choice. If you abandon your nuclear program, support for terror, and threats to Israel, there will be meaningful incentives. If you refuse, then we will ratchet up the pressure, with stronger unilateral sanctions; stronger multilateral sanctions in the Security Council, and sustained action outside the UN to isolate the Iranian regime."
Why is preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons in the interest of the United States? Are 500 hundred Iranians going to pick it up and throw it at us? Why does it matter if they have animosity towards Israel- Israel has been threatening them with war all the time- how come there will be no sanctions on them? Sanctions only cause the suffering of the Iranian people- that is not diplomacy, it is ransom.
That’s why I’ll double our foreign assistance to $50 billion by 2012, and use it to support a stable future in failing states
Unfortunately Obama doesn't realize that most of this foreign assistance ends up in the hands of the corrupt few and not any people. Not only that- but I find it completely immoral to take money from Americans and use it to fund whatever he wants in foreign countries. If people want to donate to charities to help the poor in foreign nations- how about you let them do that on their OWN instead of saying all Americans must pay this price.
I'm impressed. What's the choice? Pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain.
Big aspirations. High hopes and dreams. But what is the choice?
Folks, I doubt seriously that he will accomplish all he sets out to accomplish, although there is nothing to assure that he won't. But you have to start at the beginning, right?
mcAncient is four more years of a numbskull in front of a microphone, with a corporate hand up his ass making him smile and babble unintelligible bullshit out of his eat hole.
I want this administration held accountable for war crimes and treason against the people of the US and the Constitution. Pelosi, get your head out of your ass and get on with "the people's work". Impeachment needs to be discussed AND VOTED ON! Even if the representatives vote it down......we still need a voice in Congress. Without a vote, we have NONE....you stupid bitch!
General_Rennenkampf @ 29:
For sure, seeing as the surplus that Europe alone gets rid of due to the subsidies that the US pays it's own farmers so they can hamstring large parts of the world with their "free markets" ...... sure, other places will have to balance out to pick up local production to get away from the US poisoned economy, and that's a good thing.
Theguy @ 33:
Over 80% of foreign "aid" from the US, just goes to US companies abroad as they are allowed to class that as "aid" ......
Jerry @ 30:
The EU is an economic giant but is Major Failitude as a political system. China has an impending demographics crisis, a long bubble economy that seems to finally be starting to pop, and an increasingly restless population. India has armed Communist insurgencies and tension with Pakistan and Muslims angry at Hindu cultural imperialism. Japan's been in a funk for a while. Russia? Russia can't wipe its own ass now, politically.
The rise of Eurasia is by no means guaranteed. The fall of the US from hyperpower? We were only a hyperpower when we would ask other nations if they wanted our help and accept "no" for an answer. We're still the most powerful nation in the world, and everyone else has a great deal of issues (not, however, to say we don't, we most assuredly do.)
General_Rennenkampf @ 20:
It always amazes me that JFK gets such a squeaky clean treatment; even when he was the one responsible for an almost all out direct confrontation with the former soviet block during the Cuban crisis and escalated the proxy conflict that was Vietnam.
Johnson was the one who enabled most of the progressive policies (granted using the shock of JFK's assassination) like the civil rights and the war on poverty, and RFK was miles ahead as a progressive/liberal.
oh my who to vote for? one smuck whos a warmonger ! or the other smuck whos a warmonger? one party that is selling us out ? or the other party thats selling us out? hard choices flip a coin your bound to lose what ever side of the coin comes up!
Interesting how you can get more than 100,000 troops to Iraq in less than 30 days, but it takes 2 years to withdraw a fraction of that number.
By the way, Obama doesn't mention how many are going to stay behind in Iraq, permanently.
Do you own a che guevara t-shirt? Well that means you're a terrorist!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/17/beck.che.guevara/index.html
caution: this article may make you want to strangle an unsuspecting glenn beck as he stuffs his fat face on one quiet afternoon
Jerry @ 35:
Where exactly would they do that? What nation has the fields to match the US's? The Ukraine? Bzzt, Chernobyl. Brazil? Bzzt, been expected to rise for 60 years and counting with nothing to happen. Where else would you have fertile enough soil to feed almost 3 billion people? Canada's too cold.
1 L.A. Confidential Says: What the world really needs is a five or ten year break from the United States; a little breather so people can unwind and take it easy for a while without worrying that their wedding party will be vaporized in blast of napalm or that their brother-in-law will be dragged off to some CIA hellhole where his eyes are gouged out and his fingernails ripped off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbOVtcSUVjI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA32ikd9B34&feature=related
heehaw @ 22:
______________
Yes that Obama's criminal Adviser. People need to wake up to the fact that he is CFR, he will keep the status quo. This is the New World Order he is talking about, GLOBAL government. You will have no rights or say in anything when it comes to government like that.
The Dude @ 38:
Being a martyr tends to boost your popularity. Johnson and RFK were much better than JFK indeed, he dithered for three years on Civil Rights and was against MLK's March on Washington until RFK convinced him. Johnson got the second civil rights act passed. JFK either wouldn't, or couldn't, bother with it.
theWalrus @ 3:
Yes that would be a buck short of a wet dream.
Might I add...
5] Truth and reconciliation movement: Amsesty to those who were implicated but not directly responsible for war crimes, crimes against the constitution and crimes against humanity comitted during the Bush regime as long as they make a full confession.
General_Rennenkampf @ 37:
The US political system is a rigged world joke so having a go at the EU doesn't really make sense. The world foreign reserve currency is already shifting to the EU. China owns more of the US dept than anyone and if they have to call it in to pay their own bills that is going to cripple the US. India is one of the fastest growing and strongest ecconomies going. Russia has reverted to more Soviet rule due to what the US did to it's oil in the 90's, and then got thrown out. I noticed you completely missed south america, which is building up quite nicely now and telling the US (rightly so) where to go.
You need to do a little more than just watch CNN.
General_Rennenkampf @ 37:
The fall of the US is guaranteed, so who's left standing, so that's assured. The US has never accepted no for an answer, it's always done what was in it's best interests, just like any imperialistic country. That all you do is point the finger and try to believe that every where else is worse that it is in the US is laughable.
The sooner the US goes down and the world balances out again the better, I'm not saying it's going to be painless, though it will be much better that the US creating as much grief as it can.
I wonder how much of that bending-over-backwards to satisfy big interest groups and the Military Industrial Complex is a matter of lack of moral courage and how much is a matter of survival. If Obama stood up to the "powers that be", as it were, and did what any sane liberal would have, would he be risking a JFK-like fate? Is it really just a matter of appealing to a wider base in hopes of winning the presidency?
General_Rennenkampf @ 42:
I take it you've never studied world geography then .........
sean @ 41:
Che turned Cuba from what might have been an ordinary dictatorship into a totalitarian Communist state. In that sense, his legacy was bad indeed. The Communists Revolutionaries weren't pleasant men, I wouldn't want to eat at the same table as the Bolsheviki or the Spartacists. True belief of that sort is just as dangerous when the aim is creating a dictatorship of the proletariat as it is when the aim is creating a dictatorship of the clergy.
sean @ 41:
Beck comes from a family of alcoholic losers. His mom committed suicide when he was 13 and so did his brother later on. So, who cares what he thinks? Rush Codeine Limpballs and he have so much in common and they're both dumber than a bag of hammers.
Superb speech. His foreign policy team is also impressive. Of course, it leads to Grandpa doing another flip flop, which is staying in character these days. It's time to get out of the misguided mess in Iraq, and apply our military where it should have stayed since Tora Bora.
Jerry @ 46:
Um, dude, can you read? China's going to have some major issues with all those unemployed young men, it's also going to have to deal with an increasingly expensive population that wants to live like Americans. 300 million people doing what we do is bad. 1 billion is an utter clusterfuck. The rest of the world won't just let China hog resources any more than it's let us do it.
India is still suffering from those Communist insurgencies, they're a bleed and a drain. The Indian subcontinent has only been united for short times, they have enormous issues creating a united Indian identity, not to mention that unstable northern neighbor, Pakistan.
The EU, as I said, sucks politically. Economically it's huge, but it works even less than Tsarist Russia did, and has increasingly skepticism coming from the Continent and the UK.
Russia's a joke, it's gone from #2 economy to #15, and it hasn't grown much, if at all, even under Vladdie Putin.
Brazil, which is what I think you're referring to in Latin America, has a very powerful rich class that couldn't give two shits about its favela inhabitants and has been expected to rise for 60-odd years with nothing to show for it.
The fall of the US is assured? So then half the population of the planet dies. Somewhere around 2.46 billion people depend on US agriculture to feed them. The US goes, so do they. They go the world turns not just into a charnel house but starving nations invade supplies of food. Are you really that sure the rest of the world can afford a US fall? And China can't afford to call in that debt, it collapses the PRC as well as the US, and then not just everybody is starving and likely increasingly reverting back to the Middle Ages, but now everybody's guaranteed to revert back to the Middle Ages. The US has already fallen, our hyperpower status only worked so long as we worked with other nations.
You'll notice on recent polls mccain and Obama are essentially tied on Iraq (mccain a few points higher but within the MoE) and a few points higher on terrorism and military concerns, but Obama clearly outpaces mccain on domestic issues, so the whole election will apparently spin on what's paramount on voters minds come November.
I'm betting on domestic issues because of energy costs and related concerns.
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08.htm
Food for thought...you are a criminal, you have painted yourself into a corner, you are sitting on the worlds largest nuclear arsenal. Hmmmmm, as a criminal what should I do? Risk going to the gallows or start a war to sideline justice? Not going to get much of an argument from the Dems they are mostly blackmailed from illegal spying on them..he he!
goldenjoe @ 32:
Jerry @ 48:
I have indeed. The best agricultural supplier right now is the US. Other good suppliers in the event of a US fall and general mass starvation would be Australia (which quickly becomes an Indonesian province), the Ukraine (which becomes a battleground between Russia and the EU), Brazil (which has been expected to rise and still hasn't for 60-odd-years, and maybe Russia (if it solves a shitload of issues hamstringing it, including a blooming AIDS crisis coupled with populations shrinkage and the mess the USSR left). There are few other regions of the world with enough stability to provide food in the event of a US collapse.
General_Rennenkampf @ 37:
The only power this country has is military, and that is because we spend more in useless shit like bombs than the rest of the world combined.
The point is not that those places will have a dominant role over the US. But that the US has been shown to be a paper tiger, if you look at Iraq... basically we have gotten our asses handed to us by a country that was under sanctions for over a decade and with no military to speak of. We can not even subdue a two-bit middle eastern hell hole correctly. And seeing how the billions of dollars wasted in such an endeavor are basically borrowed in a significant fashion from foreign interests. I am not sure these foreign interests are that worried about "American hyperpower."
I believe that economically, places like Eurasia, are no longer under subsumption by American economic might, but it is starting to be the other way around. Economics trumps politics anytime. And regardless of political cohesion, the EU is a far larger market/economy than the US, and European production, distribution, and to a large extent capital is now fully integrated. And once the China/Japan/EU merry boys figure how to survive without the US being the perennial "spend it like you got it" economic engine, we will be in a world of hurt... because they will no longer have to tolerate our bullshit.
That is what Mr. Brzezinski will soon learn.
Since one target of combatants is the other side's economy and financial ability to wage war
Whose side is boosh on?
As an aside to the folks talking about China as the next superpower. I have a friend that has been in China for 3 years and he tells me that the anger in the rural areas is as bad as he has ever seen or heard since Tianimin, he tells me that we can expect some serious disturbences outside of Beijing during the Olympics. How accurate this, I dont know but he has shown me pictures of riots that have happened in the last few years that we have no idea about. BTW, he travels the rural areas a lot as a farm equipment salesman for John Deere so he has an insight many of us dont.
Grandpa...this guy is far better than you....simple as that. If McBush can get through a speech this long without fucking up his thoughts or saying something extraordinarily stupid, I'll vote for him(fingers crossed). If Obama weren't black this Presidential race would already be over.
henrywallace@54: What you've described sounds like the end of the movie "White Heat" with W playing the James Cagney role of the homicidal momma's boy. I can picture him sitting on a nuke screaming: "Top of the World, Ma!" before blowing everyone up.
General_Rennenkampf @ 52:
Russia's a joke, it's gone from #2 economy to #15, and it hasn't grown much, if at all, even under Vladdie Putin.
That's odd...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/Russian_economy_since...
The Dude @ 57:
Sure...once they figure it out. They've got to resolve quite a few issues first. Shall I list them again?
China: too many males, not enough females, aging population due to Mao's idiocy, and their economic bubble is finally popping.
Japan: Been in an economic funk since the 1980s when everybody had the exact same rhetoric towards it they have now towards China. The exact same rhetoric. Japan's been in a malaise, has a shrinking population, and also an aging one.
EU: Many EU populations are shrinking, the EU nations suffer from the same budget issues as the US, the EU has an increasingly gray population with not enough young people to provide for them like China and Japan, it has little political effectiveness, and ineffiency over an era smaller than the South alone to rival the US government over a much broader area.
India: Same demographics issues, the added bonuses of insurgencies both Communist and religious in nature with a strong Hindu fundamentalist element and a Muslim fundamentalist element as well, a subcontinent that lacks a unified identity the way China has, an unstable neighbor with nukes, hamstrung by the majority religion's ironclad social restrictions, volatile politics that include a liberal use of assassination, and to top it all off, the aftereffects that still remain from centuries of colonization.
South America: Vast gaps between the rich and poor, pitiful political leadership, endless wars and insurgencies, outside interference (us, of course), divisions both linguistically and GDP-style (Brazil, which speaks Portugese is miles ahead of all the Spanish-speaking nations), and corruption brazen enough to make anything in the US or EU or Japan look postively decent.
The US has its own issues, and I'll list them as well:
Economic malaise, population shrinkage, a larger-scale version of typical Western budget problems, increasing educational weakness, and a growing religious fundamentalism sparked by increased poverty in the US. Yet some advantage the US has is the sheer inertia of the huge economy, a strongly unified sense of identity, and the ability to keep people fed to a larger extent than any of the ones above except the EU.
Obama´s warmongering is indeed sad... and FISA unforgivable... his paymasters on wallstreet really have themselves a candidate who will provide the cosmetic change the democratic war party needs to continue the rape of it´s citizens... i will again vote for nader...