Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by MichiGator2002, May 13, 2014.
Any tweets out to Putin today?
Putin has announced (did he tweet it? I don't know) that U.S. astronauts will no longer be welcome at the space station. A move I expected given our sanctions against Russia. Maybe Michelle can help reverse this with a hashtag saying "Bringbackourspacestation."
It was actually Dmitry Rogozin (their Deputy Prime Minister) who announced it. And, funnily enough, he actually did do so on Twitter.
The # stuff is like football players wearing pink shoes and towels. Wonderful: awareness for breast cancer. Now who in USA is not aware of breast cancer. Awareness? Does that cure cancer? Maybe if it was a new disease, yes, but the only person unaware of breast cancer has been dead for 100 yr.
The feel good mentality of many is invasive in our country. We wear tee shirts with a message etc.
But what about doing something?
What about getting those girls back home?
Quit doing feel good # s and do something.
Again, we are doing something. We are flying recon missions and cooperating internationally. Please pretend that we are just sitting here and Michelle posing for pictures is the only thing that the White House has done. Because there have been multiple links that prove we have taken other actions.
So what's the harm for the First Lady getting involved in the social media campaign and raising awareness for the Nigerian girls is we are taking other action? What more can Michelle Obama do? And on that level, if you were President, Shelby, what additional actions would you take? Remember, WE ARE ALREADY FLYING RECON MISSIONS (sorry about shouting but this fact seems to be escaping many on this board) and we currently don't have the intel (location of the girls, number of B.H. terrorists holding them, etc.) to take any other significant action.
I don't know how much good it might do, but have we put the Boko Haram on the terrorist list yet? Should we? I mean, as Hillary apparently decided, we don't want them to get too much publicity.
Did you read the rivergator link in post #84 above? It explains that under Hillary, the Nigerian government asked for Boko Haram not be put on the terrorist list so to not give them any recognition. Hillary put the top 3 leaders on the list as individuals. As B. H. terrorists acts increased, we eventually had no choice and John Kerry put them on the list 6 months ago.
I think you may have chosen a poor analogy - the "pink" campaign for breast cancer awareness has not only been extremely effective in raising awareness - it also was largely responsible for over $400 million in contributions to the Susan G. Komen foundation last year - much of which goes directly to research, which is how a cure for cancer will ultimately be discovered.
With respect to the kidnapped Nigerian girls twitter campaign - it has already been successful in convincing President Jonathan to become more actively involved in trying to locate and free the children (he was previously, at best, reluctantly involved). The campaign has also encouraged Jonathan to accept international help - both feet on the ground and surveillance flights.
At some point military action may be possible to undertake in a manner that will not unduly jeopardize the victims' lives - if that point is reached I'm confidant the U.S. will offer to undertake or assist in the mission. Any action right now other than intelligence gathering would be imprudent.
Those on the right are clearly just complaining to complain (other than Rush, who's truly just off his rocker).
Our nation is filled with "feel good" stuff, but too much walk away.
Boko Harem is the same as the pink out. The CIA and FBI and Nigerian Govt asked for it to be placed on Terrorist list. Left refused. Now , oh my, there are #'s abundant. Help is on the way. Did any of those kidnapped girls die? Maybe.
I wonder how many of those Pink wearing football players donated real money to breast cancer research . The NFL is a style first, substance much later business. And they are no different than the rest of this country. If they really "cared" about the health of women, instead of making players wear pink, simply ban for 2 years any player convicted of abuse of a woman ! Ever read the list of NFL guys who beat their baby momma's, wives, girlfriends, etc.
Yes, we are "doing something" as Az Cat points out.....but doing something now vs doing something 2-3 yr ago is different. Said the 600 lb man being craned out of his apt: "I think I should go on a diet"
Such eloquence must always command respect. I don't know that I'm jealous, though.
You have your facts wrong. The Nigerian government asked Boko Haram NOT be put on the terrorist list. The government didn't want BH to gain any traction as a terrorist organization and thought putting them on the list would give them some street credibility. Hillary Clinton agreed to do what the Nigerian government asked and just put the top 3 individual BH leaders on the list, but not the group.
Now I ask again. As President, what more would you do to find these girls? And what more do you think the First Lady could be doing?
Only $4 on eBay...
Not sure which is worse. Not putting them on the list of terrorist organizations, or actually doing what Nigeria asks us to do even though it is contrary to our national security.
Not putting BH on the terror list was a calculated gamble that didn't pay. A mistake. But a few years ago, Boko Haram was a minor nuisance in Nigeria. The Nigeria government hoped they could contain the problem before it got out of hand and putting BH on the list would only hinder the government by helping BH grow.
Hindsight shows BH grew anyway and now they are a a bigger pain and causing major problems. Too bad the Nigerian government failed.
Well, you're right that there's nothing inherently wrong with what the First Lady is doing--or in what the response has been thus far (mobilizing our intelligence assets to attempt to gain workable intel...which, I have 100% confidence, we'll learn things sooner rather than later: keeping 250+ girls along with a sizeable force to guard them requires food, shelter, and other things that can be traceable). And yes, a lot of the partisan bitching is just that: Republicans/conservatives looking for things to complain about with Obama.
The larger point is that the Administration is long on symbolism and on the belief they'll be judged on their noble intentions, rather than their actions. And there is ample evidence to support that as well. When one considers that Obama's talked himself into bad situations (Syria, Iran, Crimea, Ukraine, etc) on multiple occasions, it isn't surprising that people gain the belief he's more style than substance and view him through that lens.
I hope you realize, rev, that complaining about Michelle appearing on a social media campaign comes of as nothing but partisan whining. Especially if you agree that our overall response has been appropriate and Michelle is doing what she can do to help. Maybe the Obamas are interested in style over substance, but the office of First Lady, who is an influencer, and not a decider, has always been about style. Had the Obama administration not helped with the intel missions, that would be one thing. But we have.
As for the mistake made by not putting Boko Haram on the terrorist list three years ago, again, a gamble listening to the Nigerian government that unfortunately didn't pay off. But it's a mistake that was corrected six months ago when John Kerry added BH to the terror list. Still, I wonder how much of a difference putting BH on the international terrorist list would have done to help the girls, since BH are Nigerian, and operating in Nigeria only at this point.
I do recognize that and have agreed with you there. And you're also right in observing the role and function of the First Lady's position--and Michelle Obama doing what she can do to influence and help within traditional and accepted parameters.
I'm not complaining about adding Boko Haram to the terrorist list earlier. It isn't something we do lightly--and the State Department has a heavy influence on who we do add because we are talking about the internal affairs and politics of other countries. If Nigeria didn't want them on there for their own reasons, that's something we do need to keep in mind and respect to a large degree.
My post was merely addressing the central point of the OP's article, which is that the Obamas and his Administration have done things like this before: style over substance. Words over action. It adds up.
So if Nigerian Govt did in fact ask "not to put" on terror list, but our own CIA and FBI did, why did HC follow their advice? Would give them street credibility? Huh?
Hillary Clinton and your Logic: We should not put out list of wanted criminals because it gives them credibility. We should not put a map/list/website of sexual offenders because it may cause credibility among themselves. Stupid. Then take Hamas and Hezbollah OFF the list !
The first lady and her husband (your mini god) could have not run for POTUS in 2008 and 2012, so somebody with testicles in foreign policy could be in office. That would be a start. But since we have him, he could have appointed the star of the Rose Law Firm Missing Files Division and simply said these words: "We do not play paddy cake with terrorists. Identify them and get those govts that have them to rid them. Use foreign aid as a weapon. Carry a big stick, but speak softly."
Maybe we , as a country, should never have labeled the KKK as racists, only the top 3-4 leaders. Yeah right !
Maybe we, as a country, should never have gone to war with Germany, only Adolph, Josef, and fat boy Heinrich.
First off, Obama is no deity, and I certainly don't worship him. Or anyone in a God-like manner. If/when Obama and his staff deserve criticism, I'll dish it out. Case in point, the healthcare.gov roll-out. I've worked for online companies before and understand rolling out a new website is difficult, but that cluster...
But I digress. Foreign policy is certainly tricky. Actions have consequences and things are never as black and white as you want them to be, Shelby. Hindsight is also 20/20 and we'll never know what the unintended consequences of our actions, or inactions are or might be.
Really, how do you know that if we had put Boko Haram on the terrorist list three years ago, that doesn't spark their membership and instead of kidnapping a few hundred girls in Nigeria, they kidnap thousands in Nigeria and surrounding countries? How do you know that if H. Clinton had put them on the list against Nigeria's request that today, the Nigerian government wouldn't retaliate and not allow for us and the international community to help in the search and rescue? Answers are, you don't know. But that's not going to stop you from going on some anti-Obama rant because simply put, you don't like his politics. Fact is, nothing will ever stop you from going on anti-Obama rants.
Not putting BH on the terror list three years ago was a calculated risk that failed. But it wasn't a game changer, and certainly, it's not like BH and its leadership were completely ignored by the US. Remember, the top three BH leaders were added to the terror list as individuals while we complied with the Nigerian international request to leave off the entire organization.
But I'm sure these facts will go unnoticed and you'll find something else to rant against Obama....