COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

Obama, in Germany, says Trump must 'stand up' to Russia

44 Comments
By JOSH LEDERMAN and DAVID RISING

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

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

44 Comments
Login to comment

Its funny that the Obama administration is blaming the Russians for prolonging the war even tough they have been directly and indirectly involved in supplying weapons to the "moderate" rebels and ISIS.

0 ( +13 / -13 )

ISIS and Al Qaida are the enemies.

The US and Russia are natural allies.

Although the big arms need an endless confrontation with a powerful country like Russia to keep selling billions of dollars worth of weapons (that will never be used) to the American taxpayer.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

"Stand up" to Russia? Is he kidding? So far in Trump's lies to the people about his ties to Russia he has in fact more than 250 investments in the nation, has met Putin a number of times ("He couldn't have been nicer!"), his campaign was in contact at least twice during the election campaigning, he has said he would support Russia (that includes their 'sudden' decision to full-out attack Syria), and then some. Putin loves Trump because Trump is going to help put Russia back on the map as the leading world super power in part by making the US collapse, and also by lifting up China. Putin is going to walk all over Trump and the US, and that is one reason why Putin wanted Trump in.

10 ( +15 / -5 )

Obama foreign policies do not have depth, and was mainly a play along with Liberal media ideas. The disastrous outcome of destruction, homelessness to the suffering citizens of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc and the wanton rise and growth of ISIS are obvious for all to see, when Gaddafi, etc we removed and killed. It does not matter he won the Nobel price for Peace, while his policies have so much disastrous effects on millions of Middle East people. Working with Russia to stop and destroy ISIS is necessary both militarily and economically, working in conjunction with Middle East respective elected governments. Merkel obviously does not understand history of Europe & Middle East. Taking so many Muslim refugees into Europe, is and will compound already existing extreme Islamic terrorism in European soil with bring about much greater security and terrorism threats in time to come. Merkel has invited and accelerated the Trojan Horse. Folly at the highest level.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

I like Russia where they are: isolated. They did it to themselves.

4 ( +11 / -7 )

Why is Obama telling Trump to stand up to Russia? He never did. Reset anyone???

-8 ( +5 / -13 )

Well I think not standing up to Russia would be more in line with actions like praising Putin and denying they went into the Ukraine. That's Trump's style so naturally people would be concerned.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Trump is more likely to be on his knees to Russia rather than standing up. He has a big mouth so I assume he will put it to good use in appeasing Russia. What a disappointment

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Obama has not stand up to Russia, Iran, China, Syria....just talks and retreat, and that is one of his failure legacy. These two globalists follow George Soros' open societies agenda thus creating refugees crisis, suffering,and the world of chaos. They act as talkers to cover up and justify their failures and not as leaders of common citizens at all. Obama brought down the Dems and left them in disarray through his narcissistic politics like ruined ancient Greek temple. Shame!

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Like Obama is standing up to them? Pathetic. US would be better off finding common ground with them.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

mr_jgb: "The disastrous outcome of destruction, homelessness to the suffering citizens of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc and the wanton rise and growth of ISIS are obvious for all to see,"

ALL products of the last time a Republican was in office -- Mr. gwb.

dcog9065: "Trump is more likely to be on his knees to Russia rather than standing up."

More like Trump will be grabbing his ankles.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I myself appreciate Trump's approach towards Russia. It is based on the premise that conflict with Russia is bad; the corollary is that, whenever American interests conflict with Russia's, America should defer so as to avoid conflict. Another good thing about Trump's approach is that it obviates the need for critical thought.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"Stand up" to Russia? Is he kidding? So far in Trump's lies to the people about his ties to Russia he has in fact more than 250 investments in the nation, has met Putin a number of times ("He couldn't have been nicer!"), his campaign was in contact at least twice during the election campaigning, he has said he would support Russia (that includes their 'sudden' decision to full-out attack Syria), and then some. Putin loves Trump because Trump is going to help put Russia back on the map as the leading world super power in part by making the US collapse, and also by lifting up China. Putin is going to walk all over Trump and the US, and that is one reason why Putin wanted Trump in.

Thanks Smith for the Friday laugh. That is some great material! Do you have any plans for Chritmas Comedy tour around the country?

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

"The disastrous outcome of destruction, homelessness to the suffering citizens of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc and the wanton rise and growth of ISIS are obvious for all to see," ALL products of the last time a Republican was in office -- Mr. gwb.

You left out the sacking of Carthage and Krakatoa from Mr. Bush's nefarious deeds. I mean, really.

Meanwhile, in the reality based world, the tragic effects of Obama's foreign adventurism are plain to see. To everyone but the Democrats, apparently. Rather than learning from disaster, Clinton was ready to expand the program into Syria and finally, Russia. Madness that was stopped in its tracks by Trump's election. If he does nothing else, saving the world from a new world war is enough to justify his time in office.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

urging the president-elect to “stand up” to Moscow when it violates global norms.

Only if it's involving a toast of the finest Stolichnaya at a formal banquet to both Putin and Medvedev.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Obama attempted to reset relations with Russia at the start of his presidency. This didn't work. Putin's narrative has America as the bogeyman; without that bogeyman, he needs a new narrative. Persuading him to actually change his tune on America would require giving him everything he wants in Europe and the Middle East - that would make it worth it for him. But Obama, quite rightly, wasn't willing to give Putin all that and to sell America's allies down the river; if Trump is willing to, we're on a very dangerous path. If he realises how great the price is and isn't willing to pay it, then the same thing will happen again and Putin will continue to have America as Russia's bogeyman.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

mr_jgb: "The disastrous outcome of destruction, homelessness to the suffering citizens of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc and the wanton rise and growth of ISIS are obvious for all to see,"

smithinjapan: ALL products of the last time a Republican was in office -- Mr. gwb.

Libya 2011 (wikipedia): " Muammar Gaddafi, was ultimately able to fully concentrate power in his own hands during the Libyan Cultural Revolution, remaining in power until the Libyan Civil War of 2011, in which the rebels were supported by NATO."

Syria, 2011 (wikipedia): "Since March 2011, Syria has been embroiled in an uprising against Assad and the Ba'athist government as part of the Arab Spring, a crackdown that contributed to the Syrian Civil War and to Syria's becoming one of the most violent countries in the world."

ISIS, 2014 (wikipedia): "ISIL gained prominence in early 2014 when it drove Iraqi government forces out of key cities in its Western Iraq offensive, followed by its capture of Mosul and the Sinjar massacre."

Egypt, 2011 (wikipedia): "The Egyptian crisis began with the Egyptian revolution of 2011, when hundreds of thousands of Egyptians took to the streets ..."

Obama, 2009 to present (wikipedia): "Barack Hussein Obama II ... 44th President of the United States ... Assumed office January 20, 2009 ..."

Hillary Clinton, 2009 to 2013 (wikipedia): "Hillary Rodham Clinton ... 67th United States Secretary of State ... In office January 21, 2009 – February 1, 2013 ..."

P.S. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/sep/07/barack-obama/what-obama-said-about-islamic-state-jv-team/.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Turbostat. ISIS exists because of Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Blair, and their misadventure starting 2003. All else you refer to follows on from that decision. History didn't begin in 2008.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

"Stand up" to Russia? Is he kidding? So far in Trump's lies to the people about his ties to Russia he has in fact more than 250 investments in the nation, has met Putin a number of times ("He couldn't have been nicer!"), his campaign was in contact at least twice during the election campaigning, he has said he would support Russia (that includes their 'sudden' decision to full-out attack Syria), and then some. Putin loves Trump because Trump is going to help put Russia back on the map as the leading world super power in part by making the US collapse, and also by lifting up China. Putin is going to walk all over Trump and the US, and that is one reason why Putin wanted Trump in.

And your proof of that is?

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Yeah, President-elect TRUMP will have to cleanup the foreign policy mess Barak Hussein Obama created over the last eight years. January 20th cannot come soon enough...

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Tatanka, Trump himself has blamed the mess on W Bush's invasion of Iraq. The troubled history of the Middle East did not start in 2008.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Stand up to Russia? Let's compare how many invasions and wars Russia has been in, to that of America, you might not like it but it's a fact that America, hands down, beats any other country on the planet in the last 30 years.

Someone show me a country that is truly a greater threat and let's compare.

Also, Obama "warned against a cyber arms race, saying there was clear proof Russia had engaged in cyber attacks."

Yes there is a cyber race but ask yourself who leads the way? What country is not being spied on by America? How many times and how many countries has the U.S. performed cyber attacks?

This is not a defense of Russian wrong doing's, it's just something to put things into perspective.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

thank god for russia and putin. can you imagine if obama and his "rebel" friends (read islamic terrorists) had free reign???

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

I see no one is willing to compare Russia's track record against America's, on the topics I pointed out. No takers? Ah, just down vote button pressers with no reply.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Stuart, you might want to ask Georgia about that. Or Ukraine. You might also wonder why countries bordering Russia are beefing up their defenses even while Canada and Mexico are sanguine despite Trump. When Russia fights, it does so to take something, and it is very reluctant to return it. (Can you say Etorofu?)

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Stuart,

I see no one is willing to compare Russia's track record against America's

Well, you already did that for us so there's no need for anyone else to do so.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"Let's compare how many invasions and wars Russia has been in, to that of America, you might not like it but it's a fact that America, hands down, beats any other country on the planet in the last 30 years."

You might not like it, Stuart, but if not for the American military action in Afghanistan, the good ol' Taliban would still be harboring good ol' Osama Bin Laden and keeping girls from going to school, etc.

"What country is not being spied on by America?"

Oh good grief, what country is not being spied on by any number of countries?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Laguna So you are comparing Russia fighting two wars in Ukraine, Georgia, (let's add Afgahistan), to America fighting wars in Vietnam, Cambodia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afganistan, Syria? And though it's not officially called a "war" there's Pakistan, Libia, Samolia and so on, don't forget drone assassinations in multipal countries we are not at war with.

As I've said, I don't condone Russia's actions but compare the track record to the U.S., NO country even comes close.

Yoshitsune So you are in agreement?

Serrano Are you claiming that the Taliban is not still comiting acts of terrorism or keeping girls from going to school?

Spying and cyber attacks ARE being comited by MANY countries and the U.S. is one of them, that's why Obama's statement was hypocritical. Secondly, just because many people or many countries do something wrong, that's NOT A JUSTIFICATION, NOR IS IT RIGHT!

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

You might not like it, Stuart, but if not for the American military action in Afghanistan, the good ol' Taliban would still be harboring good ol' Osama Bin Laden and keeping girls from going to school, etc.

Hillarity ensues. You do know america funded the precursor to the taliban back in the 80s to fight the Russians right? And you do know that good ol bin was leading charge? Stay off CNN. Read a book or two.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Stuart,

In agreement about what? A list of US wars is just a list of US wars. If you want to actually make a point about them then you still need to do so.

If you're not defending Russia or condoning its actions, what is the point of your whataboutery?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Yoshitsune: Turbostat. ISIS exists because of Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Blair, and their misadventure starting 2003. All else you refer to follows on from that decision. History didn't begin in 2008.

ISIS exists because Obama thought they were a Junior Varsity team not worth dealing with, and he was anxious to pull the troops out of Iraq. Or even more likely, they didn't fit the Obama administrations ain't-no-terrorists-here we're-doing-fine-on-MY-watch narrative, which would've bit any normal administration in the keister when they tried to peddle it to cover up Benghazi, but, you know, in this case, 'Obama', and, 'Clintons'.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

No, it exists because the US and friends invaded Iraq in 2003. It existed before Obama became president. Trump himself blames it on GW Bush. You seem to believe everything else Trump says, so why not this?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

ISIS started during Bill Clinton's term, in 1999, prior to GW Bush's, and flowered under Obama's negligence in 2014. And why do I have to believe anything Trump says?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant

ISIL originated as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad in 1999 ... ISIL gained prominence in early 2014 ...

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yoshitsune "If you're not defending Russia or condoning its actions, what is the point of your whataboutery?"

Clearly, you chose to ignor two of my previous post in which I say that my comments are NOT in defense of Russia's wrong doing's, nor do I condone their actions. So look again and to see how your reply is completely wrong!

All countries governments are guilty of wrong doing's, all injustices need attention and correction. The point I'm trying to make has to do with Obamas speech being hypocritical by the U.S. vomiting the same wrong doing's but doing it ten fold.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Stat,

ISIS started during Bill Clinton's term, in 1999

In Jordan, under a different name and leader. It only became the ISIS we have to deal with today because of the 2003 Iraq invasion. The blame lies with Bush, Rumsfeld, Blair et al

Stuart,

Don't worry I saw your disclaimers. I'm not ignoring them, i'm pointing out the disingenuity of them - you say you're not defending Russia, but go to great lengths to deflect implied criticism of Russia through whataboutery. Deflection and whataboutery are defence number 1 and 2 on the internet. Defence number 3 is the tu quoque accusation of hypocrisy, which I see you've just also resorted to. Obama's words in Germany weren't aimed at Russia; his intended audience was the next US administration.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

ISIS started during Bill Clinton's term, in 1999

IMO, all of this started back in 1953 when the CIA and MI6 over threw the secular democratically elected leader of Iran. Why? Because he nationalized the oil. All of the death and misery over the last 63 years is from the collusion of the oil and gas business and government, which is not they way it's supposed to be, but is, and continues this day. Anyone who understands this knew the day after 911 that Bush would be attacking Iraq. Obama's promises of Hope and Change fall flat when he continued this BS. This whole Russian economic war is because he supplies gas and oil to Europe and "they" don't like it. The Ukrainians are paying the price. The other Obama proxy war is against Syria because he defied Saudi Arabia and Qatar their precious gas pipeline in favor of an Iranian pipeline. The Syrians are paying the price. I wasn't convinced Bernie Sanders would have altered from this BS either. Wait and see about Trump, but he's on record many times that Russia is not our enemy. All the wasted money and resources Obama has wasted on his BS economic and proxy wars should land him in a prison cell IMO.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Anyone who understands this knew the day after 911 that Bush would be attacking Iraq

I knew it the day he got elected. I sat in a bar in July 2000 in Albuquerque discussing politics and predicted that if the Republicans won the upcoming election there would be an American-led war in the Middle East. The Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld clique had unfinished business. 911 only made it easier for them to get my own government and others to go in along with them.

This whole Russian economic war is because he supplies gas and oil to Europe and "they" don't like it

Not really; Russia's been supplying that gas for a long time. Russia's meddling in Ukraine triggered the economic sanctions.

The other Obama proxy war is against Syria because he defied Saudi Arabia and Qatar their precious gas pipeline in favor of an Iranian pipeline

?! Did Obama pay that Tunisian guy to self-immolate, knowing that it would lead to regional protests and a civil war in Syria?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

-1 Good Bad YoshitsuneNOV. 19, 2016 - 01:23PM JST

Stuart

Don't worry I saw your disclaimers. I'm not ignoring them, i'm pointing out the disingenuity of them - you say you're not defending Russia, but go to great lengths to deflect implied criticism of Russia through whataboutery. Deflection and whataboutery are defence number 1 and 2 on the internet. Defence number 3 is the tu quoque accusation of hypocrisy, which I see you've just also resorted to. Obama's words in Germany weren't aimed at Russia; his intended audience was the next US administration.

Simply asking to make a comparison is NOT an attempt to deflect from Russia's wrong doing's, they are also guilty of unessessary wars, human rights violations and ALL topics I mentioned. I dislike their governments actions as well as many others. I have consistently been against ANY & ALL wars that have happened or are ongoing, when that country was not attacked first! I have NOT defended Russia, I've only pointed out hypocrasies and made comparisons of who has the unessessary wars of any country on the planet.

You seem to be upset because I won't jump on the HATE wagon, and hate a whole country because of its governments actions. If I didn't love America and its people, I would say nothing. Any and all injustes needs to be acknoledged, then delt with, to ignor them is one of the worst things we can do, unless you like things the way they are?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Ok Stuart, you've made your point and your comparison and your accusation of US hypocrisy. None of which is particularly relevant to Obama's message to Trump.

You seem to be upset because I won't jump on the HATE wagon, and hate a whole country because of its governments action

Not at all. I'm not remotely upset by this insignificant internet discussion. I agree with you; no-one should hate a whole country because of its government. I don't think anyone has said otherwise; Obama certainly wasn't saying that. Nor was I.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yoshitsune: Thanks for your response.

It's funny that my supposed "off topic" comment, is what you first appeared to have disagreement with. Then you were accusing me of defending Russia, then deflection from Russia's flaws. Now you're back to the topic, which I DID mention in my first comment and another. This article doesn't cover Obama's speech word for word, nor is it taking into account all of the other hypocritical things he has said in recent past. I could clarify the specific hypocrasies but you'll probably say I'm just a trump supporter or conservative, though I voted for Obama twice.

Me being critical of a governments actions or an individual, is not intended to defend another's poor actions, justify, nor is it deflection. It's simply pointing out wrong doing's and of the mentioned topics. The wrong doing's of the U.S. Government, CIA, NSA, militaries and so on, are far more numerous than that of any other country.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yes, I disagree with whataboutery.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yoshitune: Is Whataboutery even a real word? If it is, please explain how it applies to the FACTS I presented.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Noun. (plural whatabouteries) (informal, pejorative) Protesting at hypocrisy; responding to criticism by accusing one's opponent of similar or worse faults. Protesting at inconsistency; refusing to act in one instance unless similar action is taken in other similar instances."

"Whataboutism is a term describing a propaganda technique used by the Soviet Union in its dealings with the Western world during the Cold War. When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[1][2] It represents a case of tu quoque or the appeal to hypocrisy,[3] a logical fallacy which attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yoshitune: Thank you for the definition, I looked it up as well and found a different variation of the definition but I'll go with yours anyway.

Being that I didn't even know of the term means I might not be the sharpest tool in the shed and would also suggest my responses wernt a propaganda technique, lol.

Yes, I admit protesting Hypocrisies & inconsistencies but only because that is a form of injustice. I never accused the U.S. of wars or wrong doing's that never happened, I merely stated the facts. That in no way is a defense to Russian atrocities and their own wars. However, making statistical comparisons are a way to see a broader view and not limited to only having tunnel vision. Please show me where I tried to discredit either sides injustices? Simply adding them up and comparing does NOT discredit, it's simply giving perspective of each sides claims that the other is being a threat.

For there to be whataboutery, I would have had to say that we should refuse to act in one instance unless similar action is taken in other similar instances, I never said that nor even suggested it.

I acknowledged that ALL wrong doing's & injustices need to be made aware of and delt with, how it's delt with and responded to is another thing we probably disagree on.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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