world

Deposed Ukrainian leader asks Putin for troops

41 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

41 Comments
Login to comment

"Ukraine’s deposed president Viktor Yanukovych formally asked Moscow to deploy Russian troops to re-establish law and order in his country"

In other words, put me back in power, dammit!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

And why does Putin thinks his troops are better to maintain peace than a UN peace-keeping troops?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Russia does not belong in this century.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

And why does Putin thinks his troops are better to maintain peace than a UN peace-keeping troops?

Because he wants Ukraine for himself, because it is will extend his southwest frontier to the edges of Poland and Germany. Putin is ambitious ans strong, and he one of those few people who gets things done, for better or (in our case) worse.

Obama and America are too incompetent and weak to stop Putin. America and Europe are now facing the consequences of America elected an inexperienced and incapable person to be their president.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

"...Lavrov meanwhile insisted that the Russian military presence was needed, stressing that the lives of ethnic Russians in the country were in danger."

Crimea is 58% ethnic Russian vs. 24% Ukrainian. Seems a bit lopsided in the Russian's favor.

Putin: "This is a question of defending our citizens and compatriots and ensuring human rights and the right to life,..."

Since when has he cared about human rights?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It's starting to look like Hungary 1956 all over again.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

sangetsu03,

America and Europe are now facing the consequences of America elected an inexperienced and incapable person to be their president.

This president -- as are all presidents -- is surrounded by the most talented pool available of people in the fields of diplomacy, economics, and defense. What has weakened the influential power of the United States is 40 years of half-assed, "Do as I say, not as I do" hypocritical foreign policy. Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of it, although we'd be remiss to not give a tip of the hat to the 2003 Iraq War which was based almost exclusively on the sort of fabricated pretexts (read: "lies") that Russia is currently using to justify the most blatant and aggressively illegal military incursion against a sovereign nation since . . . well . . . Iraq.

So, what's the right call here? A bit of chest thumping and bicep flexing? Because that always works so well when your opponent is as big and tough as you. (rolls eyes) Oh, wait. Perhaps you favor a "limited exchange," a brief, civilized shoot-em'-up with the 2nd most powerful military in the world? Because that won’t end badly. (rolls eyes again).

As for America's presumed "weakness" in the face of what Putin is doing, make no mistake; The US could bomb Russia back to the Stone Age (I know how hot and misty-eyed some tough-talking Americans get with that phrase, particularly when it's the lives of other people's children they're flushing down the toilet). But of course, Russia is perfectly capable of responding in kind and reducing the US to a smoldering wasteland.

Please do share your wisdom with those here regarding the best course of action. I'm all ears. What precisely should Obama be doing -- or should have done -- in order to stop this?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Obviously Putin is going to say anything in order to get the Ukraine back under his control. What he says is really irrelevant at this point since we all know what he's thinking.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

In other words, put me back in power, dammit!

He is democratically elected President as Obama. If he is corrupted, he can be prosecuted in the court. Other option is the making independent commission against corruption. According the common law, everyone has presumption of innocence.

Many nations have forced their elected leaders with Mobs on the road. If Mobs can change the government, that nation is ruled by lawless gangsters.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I would like to know why it is OK in the so called Free World (US and EU) to wait until the next elections or go through proper legal ways to change a president but when it comes to other countries such as Ukraine and Egypt, public riot and mobs are supported by those so called democratic countries?

I thought democracy was about elections and that the majority was supposed to win and not a bunch of unsatisfied people. People are so unhappy with Obama but they still wait for the next elections. The latest elections in Ukraine had no irregularities , that president has been legally and constitutionally elected.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

afroengineer, you have to include more information than that, like when a democratically elected president decides to unleash snipers on peaceful protesters. If Obama did that, I doubt Americans would wait for the next election.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The west has found that what I here see termed "mob rule" is effective in getting the type of government it wants to see in place imposed. The so called Arab Spring is a prime example of this. Britain sent in troops in the Malvinas / Falklands & the Occupied North of Ireland to protect it's citizens who owe it allegiance, so what Russia is dong here is not without precedence. Further, Russia like Iran is acutely aware of none friendly regimes being installed around it's borders, hemming them in from all sides.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@LFRAgain

Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of it, although we'd be remiss to not give a tip of the hat to the 2003 Iraq War which was based almost exclusively on the sort of fabricated pretexts (read: "lies") that Russia is currently using to justify the most blatant and aggressively illegal military incursion against a sovereign nation since . . . well . . . Iraq.

Which is completely not the same thing, who is Russia disposing? Are they getting rid of homicidal maniac? Is the Ukraine an existential threat to Russia? And the the lies based on intel gathered by the the US, French, Brits Israelis. then you would have to say, they all lied. So be more specific. If you want to talk about lies, the intelligence gathered were by a number of countries that came to the same conclusion.

So, what's the right call here? A bit of chest thumping and bicep flexing? Because that always works so well when your opponent is as big and tough as you. (rolls eyes) Oh, wait. Perhaps you favor a "limited exchange," a brief, civilized shoot-em'-up with the 2nd most powerful military in the world? Because that won’t end badly. (rolls eyes again).

As for America's presumed "weakness" in the face of what Putin is doing, make no mistake; The US could bomb Russia back to the Stone Age (I know how hot and misty-eyed some tough-talking Americans get with that phrase, particularly when it's the lives of other people's children they're flushing down the toilet). But of course, Russia is perfectly capable of responding in kind and reducing the US to a smoldering wasteland.

If you are talking about "Assured Mutual Destruction" Which is why both sides never came to that pinnacle point.

Please do share your wisdom with those here regarding the best course of action. I'm all ears. What precisely should Obama be doing -- or should have done -- in order to stop this?

For One, NOT make ANY promises, he can't keep, that would be the first thing.

My deepest concern is that China is watching these events very closely and analyzing the situation and if you don't think that this doesn't carry profound repercussions, you are only kidding yourself. If Putin is NOT stopped, this can embolden China as well for any future expansionary plans they have.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@SuperLib,

peaceful protesters, huh? Yes, they may be depending on your sources of information.

If Obama did that, I doubt Americans would wait for the next election.

Kent State shootings?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Russia is pathetic. The West really needs to have a strong response against them for this. The world will gradually be torn apart by behaviour like this.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

“So in this regard I would call on the president of Russia, Mr Putin, asking him to use the armed forces of the Russian Federation to establish legitimacy, peace, law and order, stability and defending the people of Ukraine,”

So call upon UN Peacekeepers you moron. That's their job. You don't call upon the President of another country to take such a controversial action. Ukraine is not Russia. Putin has no jurisdiction there. He should not be interfering in the affairs of other nations like this. If he was truly concerned about the Russian population in Crimea, he should have called upon UN Peacekeepers himself, not invade another country with the armed forces.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

bass4funk: For One, NOT make ANY promises, he can't keep, that would be the first thing.

What promises did Obama make? Please be specific.

afroengineer: peaceful protesters, huh? Yes, they may be depending on your sources of information.

Get lost.

LFRagain: Please do share your wisdom with those here regarding the best course of action. I'm all ears. What precisely should Obama be doing -- or should have done -- in order to stop this?

One serious problem that's developing is that Europe is already taking a position that they do not want any action to impact trade with Russia. That will embolden Putin more than anything else and effectively eliminates them from the conversation entirely, which is most likely what they want. Obama will be on his own which isn't good for the problem at hand or the US in general.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

If Putin is NOT stopped, this can embolden China as well for any future expansionary plans they have.

Putin is unstoppable. Reality is US waged the wars due to her national interest. Back in 1962, US and USSR had high noon because USSR tried to install missiles base at Cuba. President John F. Kennedy still compromised with USSR even U2 plane was shot down by Russia. No successive US president has ever retaliated for revenge of U2 plane so far. Putin has learnt a lot about 1962 stand off between US and USSR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_missile_crisis

If Kuwait and Irag have no oil, there were no gulf wars. US will not shed the single drop of blood unless Ukraine is rich in oil like Saudi or it is located at US door step like Cuba.

US has defense treaty with Japan unlike Ukraine. Unlike Russia, PRC conventional Arm Force is still inferior. Senkaku has no Chinese residents like Crimea. Therefore PRC will become dumb and dumber if it will follow the Putin footsteps.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@SuperLib,

Get lost.

No arguments. I see.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bassfunk,

Re: Suggestions for what the United States should do here:

For One, NOT make ANY promises, he can't keep, that would be the first thing.

That's not an answer, respectfully. That's rhetoric and bluster. Thus far, Obama has not made any promises that are unenforceable. Russia has been warned that there will be "repercussions." Judging by the speed and severity with which global opinion has turned against Russia, Obama's predictions are bearing out. G8 has been postponed indefinitely by most members. That's a repercussion. Government representatives from around the world have in effect boycotted the Sochi Paralympics. That's a repercussion. And these two things, the first being significant economically, the second, symbolically, have transpired in mere days.

So, I'll ask you, since sangetsu3 still seems to be busy formulating his/her formula for success in the Ukraine, what should the United States do now that will effectively force Russia to back down? You devote a lot of energy to ridiculing the ideas of others here, but now it's time for you to, as the saying goes, "put up or shut up." Please provide concrete, actionable suggestions to fix this.

I eagerly await your ideas.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@super

What promises did Obama make? Please be specific.

That there would be repercussions, so when will that take place, sometime this century or are we just going to hear Obama talk, talk and talk some more. And NO, I am not advocating a military immediate solution.

@LFRAgain

Russia has been warned that there will be "repercussions." Judging by the speed and severity with which global opinion has turned against Russia, Obama's predictions are bearing out. G8 has been postponed indefinitely by most members. That's a repercussion.

It's NOT for certain, that is just a speculative possibility. Neither isolation or sanctions seems to be deterring Russia. I have been saying on JT for years that Russia is a threat and I was right. Now let's see how long we have to wait until China makes a move.

Government representatives from around the world have in effect boycotted the Sochi Paralympics. That's a repercussion. And these two things, the first being significant economically, the second, symbolically, have transpired in mere days.

All the more reasons to build the Keystone pipeline. Well, just let us see if you are right. But I will remain optimistically skeptical.

@Athletes

If Kuwait and Irag have no oil, there were no gulf wars. US will not shed the single drop of blood unless Ukraine is rich in oil like Saudi or it is located at US door step like Cuba.

First of all, the US does NOT get most of their oil from the middle East which accounts for about 24% of total crude it imports. So you are trying to say, if Canada needed help we wouldn't help it? Stop the 90s rant.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

bass: That there would be repercussions

Bass, Obama was saying that Russia will face consequences on the world stage. And they will. You have to think about the bigger picture, not just the US, and not just Obama. There are a lot of moving pieces and players and it's not something you ignore or throw together overnight. So far, Putin has sent troops in to an area where he has a base and he has some local support. And he's stopped.

And NO, I am not advocating a military immediate solution.

You haven't advocated anything at all. Obama is on the world stage now and it's triggered more outbursts, which is all you're good for.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Is this "asks" or "asked"? Big difference in meaning. Should be remembered that Ukraine only got given Crimea in 1956 by USSR. After what we have seen in the Balkans we should not rule out russia taking it from Ukraine. and NATO will do nothing. Sanctions, meh. anyway, not sure why it is necessarily a bad thing if the majority in Crimea would rather belong to wealthy (ish) Russia than bankrupt and corrupt Ukraine... Maybe Poland will make a bid to take Lviv back.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-03-03/why-ukraine-has-lost-crimea

says it all.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@super

You haven't advocated anything at all. Obama is on the world stage now and it's triggered more outbursts, which is all you're good for.

And, uh, what solutions have you brought to the table for this worsening conflict? As far as I'm concerned on JT we are allowed to opine, are we not? So I did, I just don't agree with you. And yes, I have every reason for outbursting. So far, still Nothing from Obama and we probably won't see anything of real substance.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

we probably won't see anything of real substance.

But even if you did see something of real substance, there's zero chance that you'd ever admit it, since you've obviously made up your mind about him. One thing I fail to understand about Americans is that so many of them expect their president to be some sort of omnipotent wizard, who is supposed to be able to right all their nation's and the world's wrongs with a casual wave of his magic wand. It's guns or butter, but Americans can't have both, those days are gone.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

“This is a question of defending our citizens and compatriots and ensuring human rights and the right to life,” he said, pointing out that the “legitimate authorities of Crimea” had requested Russian assistance “to help re-establish peace in that autonomous republic.”

There have been no reports of pro-West Ukranians attacking pro-Russian Crimeans. From what I've seen and read it's the pro-Russians doing all the bullying and attacking. Russian troops need to stand down and return to their own country. This is not the 1960s and Russia is not the USSR - no matter how much Putin wants it to be!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Ukraine's population is about 45.5 million people. The protesters were about 10,000. What percentage is that of the total? Sounds like a coup d'etat. The gas companies are already reaping the benefits of this problem by raising fuel prices. Does this sound familiar like invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq? And the destabilization of Arab countries like Libya, Tunisia and Egypt? Somebody is stirring the pot.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

But even if you did see something of real substance, there's zero chance that you'd ever admit it, since you've obviously made up your mind about him. One thing I fail to understand about Americans is that so many of them expect their president to be some sort of omnipotent wizard, who is supposed to be able to right all their nation's and the world's wrongs with a casual wave of his magic wand. It's guns or butter, but Americans can't have both, those days are gone.

Funny, you would have said the exact opposite, had I supported Bush.

On the contrary, I don't expect our president to be a Wizard, but I do expect him to be a leader. If Obama did do something worth remotely getting Vlad's attention, I'm all for it, so far, it hasn't happened. Yeah, I was hard on Bush as well, I'm not a partisan, but I can say this with a fair amount of certainty.... Bush got taken to the cleaners as well during the Georgian conflict, but make no mistake, Putin wouldn't have tested Bush's willingness to use military force, he was a bit more careful. Whatever you think about him, the fact is, he had brass b**** and that was enough to give his foes second doubts. Obama on the other hand is a complete pushover. Yes, you can financially cripple him for awhile, kick him out of the G8, impose sanctions, but at the end of the day, it'll all mean nothing to this guy. Why would Russia give Obama an inch, he hasn't shown ANY strong foreign leadership. This is the test, that 3 o'clock in the morning ring. So what's up? What's he going to do, when China does the same thing and if anyone thinks that's so far fetched! look what's happening now in the Ukraine. If you libs want to keep polishing down that bitter sweet Kool-aid, be my guest. And please don't get me started on Kerry! The only thing that Obama can do is take it all and sulk, that's just about all he can do.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

bass4@You seem to be confusing not having an America-centric view of the world with "iiberal."

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Clever move. Allows Russia to claim they are acting according, and not in opposition, to its treaty obligation to the 1994 treaty guaranteeing Ukraine’s "independence and sovereignty".

See the Budapest Memorandum. http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/49/765

The one the US and UK signed as well. In exchange for Ukraine sending its 10,000 nukes back to Russia.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Bassfunk,

As I expected, you got nothin'. No ideas. No plan. No concrete suggestions for action on the part of the United States. Just a whole lot of the usual armchair quarterbacking I've come to expect from you night or day, rain or shine. You keep hinting tantalizingly at something substantive, but you can't seem to bring yourself to pull the trigger, so to speak. How ironic.

Tell you what. How about you just sit back and let the president and other world leaders who had the courage and constitution to step up and actually be world leaders -- unlike certain overly vocal armchair quarterbacks -- make the big decisions.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You seem to be confusing not having an America-centric view of the world with "iiberal."

After working for over 20 years in the media and 12 years in TV, I think I am quite dead on.

@LFRAgain

As I expected, you got nothin'. No ideas. No plan. No concrete suggestions for action on the part of the United States.

I don't need to, I'm not the president.

Just a whole lot of the usual armchair quarterbacking I've come to expect from you night or day, rain or shine. You keep hinting tantalizingly at something substantive, but you can't seem to bring yourself to pull the trigger, so to speak. How ironic.

Now you know exactly how it feels like when the shoe is on the other foot. When you libs complained when the Republicans in the office armchair quarterbacking was so vital, so important, because you guys are the party that makes sense??? Yeah, I'm seeing it in REAL TIME how libs are dealing with a real life foreign policy issue and the result is NOTHING. How ironic.

Tell you what. How about you just sit back and let the president and other world leaders who had the courage and constitution to step up and actually be world leaders -- unlike certain overly vocal armchair quarterbacks -- make the big decisions.

I'm sorry, say that again...Obama has courage? Well, geez, what other glorious feat has the anointed one accomplished besides taking partial credit of getting OBL? But yeah, I'll sit back and watch Putin gobble up in the most likelihood Kiev and even possibly the rest of Ukraine and watch Obama sit there with a stupefied look on his face and not being able to do nothing, but once again, the rest of the world that hates the US expects the US and this resident to do something. If it all weren't so sad, I'd be laughing my a** off!

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Bassfunk,

Let me spell it out for you more simply. Your biting criticisms of Obama and (empty) suggestions that he should do this, that, and the other thing are heavily overshadowed by the fact that you yourself, despite insisting you see so clearly in all matters pertaining to the nation, never stepped up to the plate to be president yourself. Obama did. He did the hard work, took the long path, and became the duly elected leader of our nation. So, yes, he has infinitely more courage than you to take on the role of guiding 300 million people for 4 or 8 years of his life.

Being a head of state is no simple task, yet you make it sound as if the glaringly obvious answers are sitting right in front of Obama's nose and he just refuses to see them. You're wrong. As you so often are on matters like this.

I'll sit back and watch Putin gobble up in the most likelihood Kiev and even possibly the rest of Ukraine and watch Obama sit there with a stupefied look on his face and not being able to do nothing

AGAIN with the scarcely concealed suggestion that Obama should be doing something different.

SHARE your wisdom, Bass. WHAT should the president do that you seem to believe is SO DAMNED OBVIOUS that you feel you can cut loose with unrelenting scathing criticisms of how things have been handled thus far.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No bickering please. Focus your comments on what is in the story and not at each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama did. He did the hard work, took the long path, and became the duly elected leader of our nation. So, yes, he has infinitely more courage than you to take on the role of guiding 300 million people for 4 or 8 years of his life.

Again, he is the president. I am NOT the one in charge, but here we are again. Now the latest news from reading all the papers today. Most of Europe will NOT back Obama and why should they. He has shown weak leadership in this deal, embolden Putin. There is too much at stake for the Europeans, even though they hate the situation. They would probably back up this president if Obama had some backbone, but he doesn't. This is his moment, he is confident, cocky, secure and knows there is NO way Obama and Europe will dispose of him.

Being a head of state is no simple task, yet you make it sound as if the glaringly obvious answers are sitting right in front of Obama's nose and he just refuses to see them. You're wrong. As you so often are on matters like this.

I hope you felt the same way about the last admin. Oh, and if I am wrong, how is Obama doing getting Vlad out of Ukraine? We will be here on JT next week and there still won't be a solution to this situation. I'm not wrong, I just don't and will never drink the political partisan Kool-aid of ANY politician.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@bass

To be fair to Obama, there's absolutely no way on Earth that any US leader could do anything to dislodge Russia from Crimea now. It's done. Fait accompli.

The EU and the US might as well not bother going through the pantomime of imposing sanctions and harming their own economies, only for everything to revert to normal in six months or so.

Putin's a thoroughly nasty character, and I reckon the people of the Crimea will soon enough have cause to regret choosing the Dark Side, but there's not a thing the West can do to change anything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is his moment, he is confident, cocky, secure and knows there is NO way Obama and Europe will dispose of him.

"Dispose" of him? Regime change? Are you serious? There hasn't been a Russian or Soviet leader in the past 70 years that has felt even a remote twinge of nervousness about the West's desire, resolve , or ability to "dispose" (your word, not mine) of him. Even at the height of US/Soviet posturing, disposing of the head of the Soviet Union was never on any rational strategic agenda in the United States or Europe.

As for this constant "Obama is weak" refrain from you and others, take a gander at this article over at The Atlantic for two days ago. It paints a pretty compelling picture of why such accusations are fairly unfounded. It also does a pretty good job of demonstrating that "strength" as you would (vaguely) define it didn't lend any more weight to G.W. Bush's pleas for Putin to stop invading Georgia in 2008 than it would today for Obama:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/03/no-american-weakness-didnt-encourage-putin-to-invade-ukraine/284168/

The point is that there's not a damned thing Obama, Bush I or II, Reagan, Johnson, Kennedy, or Alexander the Great could have done to prevent what has happened here. Putin would have done this regardless of how tough and unyielding the US or Europe was on him now or at any time over the past 10 years. The Ukraine is on Russia's doorstep and a hair's breadth away from joining the EU and almost certainly NATO. There's no way in heaven or hell he would allow that to happen, particularly with the warm-water port of Sevastopol up for grabs.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Dispose" of him? Regime change? Are you serious? There hasn't been a Russian or Soviet leader in the past 70 years that has felt even a remote twinge of nervousness about the West's desire, resolve , or ability to "dispose" (your word, not mine) of him. Even at the height of US/Soviet posturing, disposing of the head of the Soviet Union was never on any rational strategic agenda in the United States or Europe.

Relax, I was saying that figuratively. Of course, Obama can't do that.

As for this constant "Obama is weak" refrain from you and others, take a gander at this article over at The Atlantic for two days ago. It paints a pretty compelling picture of why such accusations are fairly unfounded. It also does a pretty good job of demonstrating that "strength" as you would (vaguely) define it didn't lend any more weight to G.W. Bush's pleas for Putin to stop invading Georgia in 2008 than it would today for Obama

I never said, Bush wasn't taken to the cleaners, if you go back and read some of my posts, you will see, I stated that point as well. Bush underestimated Putin even after looking into Vlad's soul, however, Bush wasn't a push over by ANY means of the very definition. That's why Putin didn't go as far as he perhaps would have liked to, because he thought deep and hard what the possible repercussions could be, unlike with Obama where Putin is NOT even batting so much as an eyelash. Obama's actions may not have encouraged Putin to invade the Ukraine, but Obama's weakness didn't discourage him or help him either, in fact, it probably made it easier.

The point is that there's not a damned thing Obama, Bush I or II, Reagan, Johnson, Kennedy, or Alexander the Great could have done to prevent what has happened here. Putin would have done this regardless of how tough and unyielding the US or Europe was on him now or at any time over the past 10 years

But Obama didn't have to open his big mouth and talk to Putin as if he's ready to do something where we all know, he can't do anything really. He just has to take it, you know where....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

LOL at another display of Obama Derangement Syndrome by sangetsu03, the fact-free John Galt/Rush Limbaugh of Japan Today. So extremely bitter and unhappy critics of the US president have gone from claiming that Obama wasn't born in the United States at all to now saying that he had never set foot outside of America prior to becoming president? Uh, he lived in Indonesia as a child. He definitely traveled to Kenya in the 1980s. In 2008, the whole world saw him speak before thousands in Berlin some six months prior to his becoming president. So actually, Obama had set foot outside America on many occasions prior to being inaugurated as president in January 2009.

I never believed that Obama was born outside of the US, having said that, where did his popularity go, only the few hopefuls that tow the line for Obama, other than that, he's a joke. He will most definitely go down in History next to Carter as the worst president, ever! Not being deranged, just telling the cold hard facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But Obama didn't have to open his big mouth and talk to Putin as if he's ready to do something where we all know, he can't do anything really. He just has to take it, you know where....

All right, you and I both know that had Obama said nothing at all, his critics would have come out in droves to crucify him. And you would have right there alongside them. Let's be real here.

At any rate, I still haven't seen any evidence of this alleged weakness on Obama's part though. What did he do that was particularly weak? Engage Putin in dialogue to get Russia to behave more like a responsible economic partner and less like an adversary? Oh, the lily-livered audacity! Never mind efforts to get the US and Russia off on a new foot started with Bush Jr. Let’s see…. Pull U.S. troops out of Afghanistan? That was a campaign promise, not weakness. He campaigned on that promise, and won in part because of it. The electorate liked the idea, need I remind you. Meanwhile, he ordered the take-down of Osama Bin Laden and had two B-1 bombers fly in open defiance over China's newly declared Air Defense Zone. And I'm not proud to say this, but Obama seems to be perfectly okay with a shocking number of drone strikes on enemies of the U.S. the world over. These are not exactly the actions of someone squeamish about breaking things and fomenting conflict.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites