What is it about Barack Obama that makes our enemies like him?

[sirs]

The fine art of projection & transferrence

[Plane]

Yea, tell that to Chamberlain, Great Britian, and all of Europe in the late 30's.  If only we were nicer to Hitler.  If only we had made him our trusted friend.  Beyond hysterical.  Talk about not learning

Nobody is saying hand anyone the keys to gates and saying, "come on in and kill us."  You guys are forgetting the successes of diplomacy.  Or would you like to do away with diplomacy altogether and just let nuclear bombs do our talking forever?

And you guys love to throw around Chamberlain.  Could you, without google or wikipedia, tell us exactly what it was that Chamberlain did to earn the title of Appeaser Extraordinaire?

I am indeed , could you provide a few examples of Diplomatic success , achieved with no threat or force?

I have forgotten them.

[Michael Tee]

<<He [Castro]also oddly conceded what the effect of his praise would be: "Were I to defend
him [Obama] I would do his adversaries an enormous favor.">>

Well, of course, that's the key to the whole thing right there.  Castro doesn't really give a shit who wins this election.  There's absolutely nothing "odd" about Castro simultaneously praising Obama and realizing that his  praise is helping McCain a lot more than Obama.

Obama might be more likely to lift the embargo than McCain, but the embargo isn't exactly a negative as far as Cuba's concerned.  It helps clarify who the real enemy is, and it helps unify and solidify support for the regime.  In a way, the embargo "keeps 'em honest."  They can't sell out the Revolution for trade incentives when there's no trade going on.

In Osama's case, everything that he says has to be read through the lens of reverse psychology.  No way could he have believed that his endorsement would actually boost any American.  In fact, I think most people understand now that Bush has been far and away the best President that OBL could ever have hoped for.  The real repercussions of Bush's stupid adventurism have yet to be felt and already he's brought the nation to the edge of ruin.  And the beauty of it is, it can only get worse under McCain and Obama will never get the mandate to turn it all around.  He's already back-tracking and he's not even President yet.

I also couldn't resist some comments on the so-called "appeasement" issue.  "Appeasement," like war, is just a tactic, a way to approach a perceived problem.  It's as foolish to say that "appeasement never works" as it would be to say that "an uppercut never works."   All tactics will fail in some circumstances - - appeasement didn't work out too well for Chamberlain, but then going to war didn't work out so well for Hitler.

I think, if one is going to hold up Neville Chamberlain as the supreme example of the folly of appeasement, it would be smart to know a little more about the facts of the case than the cartoonish oversimplifications that Americans, through their dumbed-down educational systems and corrupted MSM, believe to  be "the truth."

Appeasement of Hitler by Great Britain and France took place against a background of intensive German rearmament and a belated but on-going attempt by Britain and France to catch up to, and overtake, Germany, particularly in air-power.  Basically, appeasement bought time for the Allies - - time to rearm, to catch up.  It helps in understanding the situation to remember that, unlike Germany, Britain primarily (and to a lesser extent, France) had to prepare for the defence of a world Empire against Japan, Italy and the U.S.S.R. and only secondarily for a war in Europe.  So the options to appeasement of Germany were rather limited.   It's problematic at best to claim that appeasement was a total failure.

Of course when one compares the relative strengths of the U.S. and its adversaries today (Iran, Cuba, etc.) it is just ludicrous to equate dialogue with "appeasement."  Even if one accepts the most simplistic definition of Munich-era appeasement ("They gave away the store and got nothing in return.") there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to expect any such result from any dialogue that Obama proposes.  It's just ludicrous to compare the position of the U.S. vis-a-vis its current "enemies" with the position of Britain and France in the 1930s vis-a-vis Nazi Germany.

What's the real reason why the Right is scared shitless of any kind of dialogue with "rogue states" or "the Axis of Evil?"  IMHO, it's to give them complete control of the narrative so that they and their MSM accomplices can continue to hoodwink the people with the same kind of bullshit they've been able to get away with for years ("They hate us for our freedoms."  "They want a New Caliphate." etc.) 

When you're talking to somebody, you at least have to hear what they say.  When you're not talking to them, and they're not talking to you, you get to write all their lines by selectively cherry-picking whatever any one of them (no matter how batshit crazy he may be) has ever said anywhere or any time.  But of course, talking over one's differences is vastly superior to war as a first resort - - as Winston Churchill once said, "Jaw-jaw is better than war, war."

[Brassmask]

I am indeed , could you provide a few examples of Diplomatic success , achieved with no threat or force?

I have forgotten them.

I find it difficult to believe that you have forgotten your blessed Richard Milhouse Nixon going on his trip to China to visit with mass murderer Chairman Mao Zsedong.

Or that you could forget all those meetings between Ronald Reagan and assorted Heads of State from the USSR.

Or that you could forget the summit between Gorbachev and Bush 41.

How about Carter's Camp David Accords?

What about the SALT Treaties?

Beuhler?  Beuhler?  Beuhler?

[sirs]

Welcome back, Tee

[Michael Tee]

Thanks, sirs.

[Plane]

I am indeed , could you provide a few examples of Diplomatic success , achieved with no threat or force?

I have forgotten them.

I find it difficult to believe that you have forgotten your blessed Richard Milhouse Nixon going on his trip to China to visit with mass murderer Chairman Mao Zsedong.



Or that you could forget all those meetings between Ronald Reagan and assorted Heads of State from the USSR.


Or that you could forget the summit between Gorbachev and Bush 41.


How about Carter's Camp David Accords?


What about the SALT Treaties?


Beuhler?  Beuhler?  Beuhler?

Which of these would have happened if the USA were not very powerfull?
The Soviets and Chineese never talked to nations that they could just take over instead.

If Nixon had all the moral authority of the Dali Lama , and about the same military strength , he would have negotiated with Mao on about the same terms that the Dali Lama does.

[Brassmask]

Which of these would have happened if the USA were not very powerfull?
The Soviets and Chineese never talked to nations that they could just take over instead.

If Nixon had all the moral authority of the Dali Lama , and about the same military strength , he would have negotiated with Mao on about the same terms that the Dali Lama does.

The powerful part of America don't even enter into it.

Mao was a "murderer" right?  Yet, Nixon and Kissinger got on a plane and went over to talk to him.  Opened China right up.

But I've never heard you call Nixon an appeaser once.  If you have please let me know.

[Plane]

Which of these would have happened if the USA were not very powerfull?
The Soviets and Chineese never talked to nations that they could just take over instead.

If Nixon had all the moral authority of the Dali Lama , and about the same military strength , he would have negotiated with Mao on about the same terms that the Dali Lama does.

The powerful part of America don't even enter into it.

Mao was a "murderer" right?  Yet, Nixon and Kissinger got on a plane and went over to talk to him.  Opened China right up.

But I've never heard you call Nixon an appeaser once.  If you have please let me know.

Actually I like makeing the connection between Nixon and Obama.
Nixon , Obama
Tricky Barak
Hmmmmmm...

The point is that the agreements were worked out between the US and China before Nixon went to the summit , it would not have happened if the US were not very strong and also able to give to China stuff it wanted .

What would Barak Obama say to Acmedanejad if they were to meet?

"Hi there Achmed ! How are the wives?"

[Michael Tee]

<<What would Barak Obama say to Acmedanejad if they were to meet?

<<"Hi there Achmed ! How are the wives?">>

LOL.  I don't think you're supposed to refer to a man's female relatives, for sure if you haven't already been introduced to them previously, and maybe even if you have, because it insults the guy's honour.  Sounds like you already know these babes, which means you didn't need him to introduce you to them, and leaves open the question of just how well you know them.  You could probably lose some serious body parts if you said this to the wrong guy.  And Ahmadinejad sure doesn't look like the right guy.

I would sit quietly on the rug for a few minutes with a downcast expression on my face, staring down, and then I would say, "Oy,"  in a big exhalation of breath.  About ten seconds of silence, then I'd repeat the "Oy."  And then I'd say, "Mahmoud, my friend, I've got problems."

And Ahmadinejad, I mean, Mahmoud, would simply say, "Tell me, Barak, my friend," and I'd say, "It's dat  bitch Hilary, she's still undermining me, Mahmoud," and he'd ask, "Would you like me to take care of her for you?" and I'd thank him politely and decline, but we'd embrace as brothers, because he'd at least offered, and from there we'd move into matters of substance.

[Plane]

<<What would Barak Obama say to Acmedanejad if they were to meet?

<<"Hi there Achmed ! How are the wives?">>

LOL.  I don't think you're supposed to refer to a man's female relatives, for sure if you haven't already been introduced to them previously, and maybe even if you have, because it insults the guy's honour.  Sounds like you already know these babes, which means you didn't need him to introduce you to them, and leaves open the question of just how well you know them.  You could probably lose some serious body parts if you said this to the wrong guy.  And Ahmadinejad sure doesn't look like the right guy.

I would sit quietly on the rug for a few minutes with a downcast expression on my face, staring down, and then I would say, "Oy,"  in a big exhalation of breath.  About ten seconds of silence, then I'd repeat the "Oy."  And then I'd say, "Mahmoud, my friend, I've got problems."

And Ahmadinejad, I mean, Mahmoud, would simply say, "Tell me, Barak, my friend," and I'd say, "It's dat  bitch Hilary, she's still undermining me, Mahmoud," and he'd ask, "Would you like me to take care of her for you?" and I'd thank him politely and decline, but we'd embrace as brothers, because he'd at least offered, and from there we'd move into matters of substance.

And when he learned you were Jewish , he would stop takeing you seriously right then.

[Brassmask]

The point is that the agreements were worked out between the US and China before Nixon went to the summit , it would not have happened if the US were not very strong and also able to give to China stuff it wanted .

What would Barak Obama say to Acmedanejad if they were to meet?

"Hi there Achmed ! How are the wives?"

What the hell did Nixon and Mao have in common?

And please, I'm dying to know, why is it that Nixon "giv[ing] China stuff it wanted" not appeasement but somehow going to Achmanenajad and working out some kind of peaceful resolution to our conflicts WOULD BE?

And please tell me, are you implying that America was somehow strong during Nixon's regime and we are now weak during Bush's utter failure of a regime?

And please remind me.  Were there constant rumors of Nixon planning to bomb China to hell and back at that time before he went to visit Mao?

[Plane]

And please remind me.  Were there constant rumors of Nixon planning to bomb China to hell and back at that time before he went to visit Mao?

Well yes of course, Nixon was a communist fighter from away back , if that were not so then he would not have had the credability to sell a treaty to our own Senate.

If a president with a more concilliatory reputation had gone to Mao  the people of America would have been very suspicious of the whole situation.

Only Nixon could go to China without fear of being labeled an appeaser.

And Nixon did not go there to negotiate , that ws finished before he got on the plane.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Only Nixon could go to China without fear of being labeled an appeaser.

This was because anyone other than Nixon would have been labeled a traitor by one other than Richard F*cking Nixon. This is like the kid that murders his parents and throws himself at the mercy of the court, because he is an orphan.
====================================

And Nixon did not go there to negotiate , that ws finished before he got on the plane.

So what? He started the deal. He went there to sign off on what may have been agreed to by Kissinger and his Chinese counterparts before the visit.

The productive part of all this was that both sides began discussions, to seek out places where they could find agreement. If you say that Nixon was a hero, but Obama would be a traitor for doing the same thing.

Know that you are not arguing about actions, but nuances in how those actions might be dealt with. And that is  immaterial. The goal is peace and justice. No peace and no justice is ever attained by stubbornness and stupidity, which are the cornerstones of Juniorbush and Cheney's foreign policy.

I am sure that Obama and whomever he is going to talk with will have an agenda, with the proviso that other topics might be discussed by mutual agreement.

[fatman]

Which of these would have happened if the USA were not very powerfull?

If the US weren't powerful, we wouldn't have needed SALT or the Gorbachev/Bush Sr summit.  As to the Camp David accords, I see that Qatar is hosting a peace talks for Lebanon and recently brokered a peace settlement in Yemen, I don't think that you necessarily need to be powerful to do that, but you do need credibility.  And lastly, for Reagan to meet with heads of state is nothing unusual, even small and marginalized nations do that.