I thought I’d drop this here in case you missed it. Once again, the Republicans are OUTRAGED at how diplomacy works. Fuck them.
I’ll try and find the actual video to embed, but until then, click this link for the video and the outline.
UPDATE: Try this video, looks like it’s the entire speech.
.
TaMara (BHF)
Apologies to Betty Cracker because I know she’ prepping a NFL thread as I post this.
feebog
We were well on the way to the same outcome with North Korea during the Clinton administration. Then the Supreme Court appointed Shrub and he couldn’t drop negotiations soon enough. As a result, North Korea now has nuclear bombs. But of course none of that matters because IOKIYAR.
raven
D58826
Or you can listen to Chuckles interview Marco the magnificent. Marco explained how as a STRONG president Iran would not have dared due any of the evil things that they have done under the WEAK Obama. As a STRONG president he would have told the Iranians to release the hostages before he would refuse to talk to them any way. He would follow in the example of Saint Ronulus the Unenlightened in his dealings with Iran . Chuckles did not ask the obvious follow up question – would Marco send a chocolate or vanilla cake to the Iranians as part of his STRONG president policy.
Baud
@D58826:
The Republicans are essentially Monday morning quarterbacks, except they also complain when America wins.
debbie
@raven:
Donald Trump made him do that.
smintheus
I was deeply impressed when Hillary decided she needed to take a potshot at the Obama administration’s success in negotiating with Iran.
Nothing says ‘serious’ like adopting Republican belligerent rhetoric.
D58826
And in this corner another LEADER is heard from:
Trump is probably correct but totally unaware that it applies to him as well – the US is the laughing stock of the world with clowns like these running for president.
raven
@smintheus: If she wins she will kill the first thing that moves just to prove she’ll do it. Take it to the bank,
Baud
@smintheus:
Yeah, really Republican.
Baud
@raven:
Can I nominate someplace in Oregon?
D58826
first time I’ve seen this – IIOOVIN (If it’s Obama our vote is NO). But then I spend a lot of time looking for ink for my quill pens
smintheus
@raven: Wouldn’t be surprised to see her in camo out hunting ‘varmints’ before long.
smintheus
@Baud: She’s for the undeniable successes but against appeasement. Yep, Republican rhetoric.
Baud
@smintheus:
Appeasement is a Democratic principle now?
smintheus
@Baud: Did you read all of her comments? Quite in line with the 2008 candidate who decried Obama for saying that he’d be willing to negotiate with Iran without preconditions.
Baud
@smintheus:
You mean like this one
Wait, was that Clinton or Ted Cruz. I can hardly tell the difference?
ThresherK (GPad)
Waiting for someone to tweak Reagan’s speech in 1981 on the subject, pass it off as Obama’s,and see if the RWNJs can tell the difference
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@smintheus: One thing to wary of – TheHill is a very strongly “inside baseball” publication. Almost everything there has a strong underlying slant – either pro-Teabagger or pro-Lefty/Leftist/whatever-term-you-want-to-use. They have pundits on both sides of the divide.
Don’t take their reporting at face value. Even quotes can be slanted by the framing and the editing.
In this case, it is clear that someone is pushing the “Hillary is a hawk!!1” meme.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
smintheus
@Baud: Thus she’s for the diplomatic successes but against Obama’s diplomatic restraint. What part of the comments I quoted do you find impressive coming from a Democrat?
Baud
@smintheus:
Did you see Raven’s quote above that Obama just imposed new sanctions against Iran? Is Obama a Republican too?
MattF
The underlying theme of Republican foreign policy is that premature ejaculation is actually a good thing.
smintheus
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Fair enough, it could be The Hill is sand-bagging Clinton by misconstruing her comments. But those comments per se, especially the complaint about thanking Iran for releasing sailors whom they supposedly mistreated, are nauseating.
smintheus
@Baud: What part of the comments I quoted impress you?
Baud
@smintheus:
Whether I’m impressed or not has nothing to do with whether Clinton is adopting Republican rhetoric, which is what you claimed. It’s as stupid as anyone saying Sanders has adopted the Republican rhetoric on guns.
Corner Stone
@smintheus: That’s not your initial standard in this back and forth.
Eolirin
Hillary, at least when talking to US audiences, definitely comes across as more aggressive than Obama, but there seems to be very little space between them in terms of actual approach on these issues.
smintheus
@Baud: Shane Bauer:
Eolirin
@smintheus: Calling for the exact same new sanctions that Obama just went and put into place…
smintheus
@Corner Stone: Yes it is. I quoted parts of Clinton’s comments for a reason: to show her once again at her depressing worst.
Baud
@smintheus:
Cool. You found someone on the internet who agrees with your wrong position.
And I guess Obama is worse than Trump too since he just imposed new sanctions on Iran. At least own up to the consequences of your viewpoint.
smintheus
@Eolirin: She didn’t just advocate sanctions, did she? Clinton decried weakness in diplomatic responses to Iran; what part of that is hard to understand?
smintheus
@Baud: Good job of ignoring what I’m saying.
Shell
John Bolton is particularly moronic. “Diplomatic Debacle” for the US, indeed. I think he’s incapable of framing anything except in apocalyptic terms. (Or is that most Republicans) In 2008, he said if Obama was elected, Iran would have a nuclear bomb because diplomacy had failed!
Baud
@smintheus:
You haven’t answered even one of my questions.
I saw nothing in the article you linked to that explains how Clinton’s position is Republican or even how it significantly differs from Obama’s. Does that answer your question?
Eolirin
@smintheus: Um decried weakness is a much more specific claim than what you’ve provided evidence for. Saying ‘this is good progress but there is more left to do yet’ isn’t decrying weakness. Saying ‘we shouldn’t thank people for doing the right thing’ doesn’t amount to claiming we’re on the wrong track diplomatically.
ETA: You are basically arguing over tone, and not actual proposal or tactics. Hillary is not suggesting we carpet bomb people or that we not pursue a sanctions and diplomacy centric approach to Iran. All of the republicans are.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@smintheus: I agree with you that her rhetoric often seems over-the-top when i comes to things like Iran:
The first debate this cycle:
Q: Which enemy are you most proud of?
Clinton: Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians.
2008:
“In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
“That’s a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic,” Clinton said.
:-/
It’s hard to know how much of that is bluster, how much of it is calculation on her part, how much of it is over-compensating for being a woman, etc. It’s disconcerting.
But we need to look at what she did as SoS, and the actual positions she’s advocating now, as well the bluster.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
Eolirin
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Yes, this exactly.
john fremont
@D58826: I remember a press conference with Gen Schwarzkopf during Desert Storm where he addressed the term carpetbombing when asked by about it by a reporter. Schwarzkopf replied he didn’t know what that term meant and gave the same answer the article you referenced. The conservatives had a field day with it mocking the librul namby pamby reporter knowing nothing about military doctrine and Stormin Norman setting her straight! Today, Ted Cruz can be a contender for the GOP presidential nomination, what a change.
gene108
@smintheus:
From the rest of your link. Clearly a copy of Republican talking points, by congratulating President Obama and praise of the nuclear deal.
D58826
GOP should replace the elephant with King Kong. Nobody can out chest thump King Kong!!!!
gene108
@smintheus:
But in the end Team Obama did not negotiate without pre-conditions. Team Obama brought crippling sanctions on Iran. As a condition for negotiating a relief of sanctions, the US and its allies had conditions Iran had to comply with, with regards to its nuclear program.
El Caganer
I wonder if anybody in Washington is delusional enough to think that other countries will follow our lead with these new sanctions on Iran. The concern about Iran’s ballistic missile program was that they would develop missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Since they don’t have and apparently aren’t going to have nuclear warheads, who cares about their ballistic missile program? Several of their neighbors already have ballistic missiles (the Israelis have nuclear-tipped ones), and we’re not shitting ourselves about that.
Baud
@El Caganer:
I don’t know the answer to that question, but according to the excerpt raven quoted at #3, it was a UN resolution that Iran violated.
El Caganer
@Baud: Yes, it was a UN resolution, but that resolution was passed before Iran had agreed not to develop nuclear weapons. I don’t see any benefit in these new sanctions, other than the rather dubious one of being able to say we stuck a finger in Iran’s eye. It seems to me that we’re undercutting our own diplomatic successes.
Baud
@El Caganer: Fair points.
Patricia Kayden
If Rightwingers hate something, that automatically mean that it is good and sensible. They can go kick rocks. No one cares about their constant outrage that a Black man is in the White House.
Rick Taylor
@smintheus:
Republicans aren’t even for the undeniable successes.
D58826
@El Caganer: I suspect that the Iranians knew these were coming and don’t care. I think they are on suppliers and businesses and not directly on Iran. So probably more for show than anything else. Obama has to do a bit of chest thumping.
Momus
@D58826: Godzilla can.
WaterGirl
@TaMara (BHF): You guys worry too much about stepping on someone else’s post. We are capable of being in two or more threads at once! In fact, that’s when BJ is the most fun.
Anne Laurie, stop scaring the other front pagers. :-)
WaterGirl
@smintheus: Ugh on clinton’s response. Yeah, but there’s no difference between Clinton and Obama. Right.
WaterGirl
@Baud: “…but warned that all concerns about Iran are not assuaged.”
Like President Obama is so dumb that he doesn’t know that? Right now we should be really happy about the way things played out with the 4 Americans who have just returned. What’s to be gained by not thanking Iran for doing the right thing and then saying “but we don’t trust you anyway”?
:: apparently grouchy about Clinton today ::
FlyingToaster
@El Caganer: I’m pretty sure it’s about the whole “we’re allies with the Saudis so stop building missles that can hit them” thang. Once nukes are off the table, the next issue is who is destabilizing the neighborhood more, Iran or Saudi Arabia. Which list used to include Iraq and Syria, and look what’s happened to them.
WaterGirl
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: If that’s true, I can vouch for the fact that it’s working on me.
D58826
@Momus: point well taken
D58826
ouch two different football games. first half Panthers 31-0. second half so far seahawks 21-0. They switch uniforms at the half??
jackmac
Has Rafael “Carpet Bomb ‘Em Back to the Stone Age” Cruz ever served a day in any military service — U.S. or Canadian?
NorthLeft12
Funny, the CBC website had a story about Pres. Obama “boasting” about what he was able to accomplish with Iran without a war. A little odd wording I thought, but you know what? I agree with Ali [I think] who said, “It’s not bragging if you can do it.”
Thank Dog that the US had a President with intelligence, confidence, and self-control in charge at this time. I can barely imagine the shitshow that would have occurred under any of the idiot Republican candidates for President.
gelfling545
@WaterGirl: This is a thought I have had. I hate it that one post is deemed “dead” as soon as the next one, possibly on a completely different topic, appears. Most other blogs feature several posts all happily existing at the same time.
Uncle Cosmo
@jackmac: Crooze is Dudley Far-Right of the RCMP–the Reactionary Craxy-ass Mountebank Politicos.
Cain
@NorthLeft12:
Well likely a U.S. with a flaming hole for a money, a scaling back of all social programs if not elimination, and then finally war with as many 4-5 adversaries. At the end, they will then blame democrats even though they hold all branches of government and will also call us spineless traitors and likely will begin a purge to get rid of us all, because you know, you can’t fail conservatism, you can only fail at implementing it, and if we remove all obstacles (e.g. democrats) we will have prosperity for a million years as we all become serfs and love that life, as we work the land for pittance, while having all the guns passed on by our ancestors, but have no money to buy any bullets.
The End.