Support




Contact
Powered by
Movable Type

Obama Deliberately Omitted "Democracy" From Those Aspirations the US Would Support

Too idealistic, or something.

Kaus asks:

I'd give up on the drug war (and the attempt to eradicate Afghanistan's opium crop) before I'd give up democracy.... P.S.: So we really are in for a mirror image of the 20th century, when it was liberals who criticized the U.S. government for siding with strongmen in order to fight the global enemy (Communism)

I think Obama generally favors any policy that 1) pleases the nutroots by repudiating Bush and 2) minimizes US efforts in the War on Terror ... for the moment.

Incidentally, I don't think we need Obama to tell us his foreign policy. Liberal Democrats do not have a foreign policy of their own. Their purported foreign policy is always one step down from whatever Republicans call for.

If we call for war, they call for sanctions.

If we call for sanctions, they call for diplomatic pressure.

If we call for diplomatic pressure, they call for nothing.

It's not rocket science.

I think "nothing" is their genuine all-purpose response. But they rhetorically call for something one step down the ladder each time to oppose while sounding "tough."

Posted by: Ace at 04:26 PM



Comments

1 Democracy just won't work in the communist state he is determined to establish. Thank you enlightened voters . . . you assholes really got us in a fix this time.

Posted by: rplat at November 12, 2008 04:31 PM (Qrnps)

2

OT but interesting

Not something an average Obama cabinet member will try, but can we get some hu-rahs?

Just another example of capitalist machinery climbing to new heights.

Posted by: Cromagnum at November 12, 2008 04:36 PM (iVVqW)

3

He doesn’t support “Democracy” here so why do we think he would support it somewhere else? However, I don’t support fucking “nation building” either. After we took out Iraq we should have entered Iran and took them out at the same time we encouraged Israel to take out Syria.

After that we could leave.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2008 04:37 PM (Qd7GC)

4 So we really are in for a mirror image of the 20th century, when it was liberals who criticized the U.S. government for siding with strongmen in order to fight the global enemy

That's because in the minds of those in charge the global enemy is us.

Posted by: rockhead at November 12, 2008 04:38 PM (DvaIL)

5 But they rhetorically call for something one step down the ladder each time to oppose while sounding "tough."

That is a profound observation, boss

Posted by: toby928 at November 12, 2008 04:38 PM (evdj2)

6 "I think "nothing" is their genuine all-purpose response."

Uh, no.  You forgot the thing one step down from nothing:

surrender

Posted by: someone at November 12, 2008 04:40 PM (zHoxL)

7 If you allow yourself a lucid moment to calmly contemplate the Obama presidency you could actually die of embarrassment.

Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 12, 2008 04:40 PM (TXp3z)

8 Their purported foreign policy is always one step down from whatever Republicans call for.

What's one step up from 'stopping Iran from getting a nuke"?

Posted by: DrewM. at November 12, 2008 04:41 PM (hlYel)

9 fucking half the internet is down, and Ace is one of the only sites i can still visit, hmmmmmmm. Something is fishy.

Anyone else not able to hit google.com?

Posted by: RiteWingFascist at November 12, 2008 04:42 PM (1hSHv)

10 Obama Deliberately Omitted "Democracy" From Those Aspirations the US Would SupportThat's because the world-wide government will only be "democratic" in name.

Posted by: rockhead at November 12, 2008 04:42 PM (DvaIL)

11

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, let's put ace's hypothesis to the test:

One step down from "nothing" would be what?  

Sending Iran 200 meeeeelion dollars with no strings attached.

by crikey, it's a LAW.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at November 12, 2008 04:43 PM (GuX8p)

12 Tsk, tsk, such cynics! Obama's foreign policy can be summed up in one word - "love". He is the Messiah and he bring "love" to the world and since everyone loves us now, there will be peace, joy and endless prosperity to be had by all! No more of this fighthing business, evil dictators will just fade away into the sunset as the Messiah comes on his white horse to save us all!!!!

Posted by: IC at November 12, 2008 04:44 PM (jZNCU)

13 Anyone else not able to hit google.com?

Just hold your horses, they're upgrading their spy software. 

Posted by: rockhead at November 12, 2008 04:45 PM (DvaIL)

14 Anyone having trouble with Cell phones? Can't get service today.

Posted by: SarahW at November 12, 2008 04:48 PM (7sl9X)

15

Don't worry about foreign policy. Barry has got a couple of "experts" on the job.

Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama named former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former Republican Representative Jim Leach as his emissaries at the international economic summit in Washington.

Albright and Leach will be available for unofficial meetings with representatives of industrial and emerging countries who will be at the summit being hosted by President George W. Bush on Nov. 14-15.

``There is one president at a time in the United States, so the president-elect has asked Secretary Albright and Congressman Leach, an experienced and bipartisan team, to be available to meet with and listen to our friends and allies on his behalf,'' Obama's senior foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough said in a statement.

Barry likes to say, one president at a time but, does everything he can to start running the show right now.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 12, 2008 04:49 PM (1Jaio)

16 "The game is afoot" with the internet.

Posted by: Mike H at November 12, 2008 04:50 PM (1V2sa)

17

Anybody else not able to get it up today?

 

Posted by: Lee at November 12, 2008 04:50 PM (TxTIh)

18

The Internet, I mean.

 

Shit.

Posted by: Lee at November 12, 2008 04:51 PM (TxTIh)

19

Speaking of the Obamessiah, anyone else seen those post-election Obama ads?  I thought they'd wait to start the run for re-election until after the inauguration.

I always fail to underestimate politicians.

Posted by: huerfano at November 12, 2008 04:53 PM (knHvu)

20 I think "nothing" is their genuine all-purpose response."

Uh, no.  You forgot the thing one step down from nothing:

surrender

someone, their positions are nothing more than sub-sets of surrender.

Commenting from Calgary, AB, I'm...

Posted by: David in San Diego at November 12, 2008 04:54 PM (agF8S)

21 Yes, the next years will be a mirror image of liberals in the past criticizing the US for supporting local dictators and strong-men.

But that was already happening.

For better or worse, Bush really did push for those old liberal ideals of democracy and (gasp) social justice.   His was a very idealistic take on the world... freedom and those fluffy-feely notions of individual actualization and whatnot... addressing what used to be called "root causes" or some such.

And for six years the "liberals" have been reflexively taking the opposite stand, likely *because* it was opposite.   Stability was the catch word for the realists.   Idealism was now scary and unrealistic.   Now it was pragmatism and throw those poor people yearning to be free under the bus.  How many liberals or progressives have argued these last six years that *of course* we were setting up puppet governments and *of course* we shouldn't allow them to go against our wishes on anything.

I don't think that conservatives should view this shift, this flip-flop with alarm, but to a significant extent what is being *conserved* is classic liberalism.   And that is right and good.   Conservatism has never been about not-changing at all, it's been about adopting new ideas slowly, as they've been tested and proven, instead of dashing after the next shiny thing.   Propping strong-men because they favored us or valuing stability over freedom has been shown to fail.    It just doesn't work.   What *works* is freedom, including freedom to *not* be our bosom-buddy.    Being *friends* is more or less irrelevant if a country is good to it's own people, has freedom, and an active economy.

Posted by: Synova at November 12, 2008 04:56 PM (NxP4A)

22

It's not rocket science.

With all due respect, I personally believe that at the end of the day it will be a nightmare.

Posted by: polynikes at November 12, 2008 04:56 PM (m2CN7)

23 The Iraq war is all but won except for the need to keep out troops there for a deterrent. I am guessing Obama, being beaten over the head with it during the election,  is somewhat aware of this public perception and is now not eager to drop the ball. He has adopted a won war and any failures will rest solely with him.

On a side note, I find myself still wanting to win in Iraq and Afghanistan even though we have a democratic president. Does that mean I am one of the united?

Posted by: robtron12 at November 12, 2008 04:58 PM (gue+Q)

24 "If we call for war, they call for sanctions."

IF WE CALL FOR WAR!!!! Such a tough lil' fatty. Why aren't you supporting our future President? You're coming across as awfully pissy.

Aren't you supposed to be organizing your webring for the bright shiny tomorrow of Jindalvision? All you are doing is working yourself up in to knots over trivia. IS THIS ANY WAY TO LEAD A REVOLUTION!?!? you gots to be organizing man. Let the bitches whine their way towards irrelevance, you got bigger plans.

Seriously, the country is done with you guys and all your horseshit, so stop fighting the ghosts of the past.

I guess it doesn't matter anyway, this shithole will be gone soon, and then what?

Posted by: fancy melosi at November 12, 2008 05:03 PM (oOYYX)

25 >>But they rhetorically call for something one step down the ladder each time to oppose while sounding "tough."

They are willing to be tough, even tougher than Repubs, as long as they are sure it won't be acted upon.
Bush wanted: War with Iraq, Multilateral talk with NKorea and sanctions against Iran.
Dems wanted Sanctions on Iraq, unilateral talks with NKorea, and war against Iran (at one time).

The cornerstone of their foreign policy is: Not Bush

Posted by: Tushar at November 12, 2008 05:05 PM (PTWes)

26 We call for a troll and they send a retard.

Posted by: polynikes at November 12, 2008 05:06 PM (m2CN7)

27 Nov. 4th Dow close: 9,625
Nov. 12th Dow close: 8,282
Loss of 13.95%

I know, I know. It's just a coincidence. Still ironic considering how much faith Wall Streeters have in "Teh One."

Posted by: adamthemad at November 12, 2008 05:06 PM (kIjlp)

28 you forgot to add that they will always step it down on notch in reality but step it up one notch in rhetoric.

we want war, they want "tough, effective" sanctions

we want sanctions, they want "tough, effective" diplomaic pressure

we want diplomatic pressure, they want "tough, effective" nothingness.

Posted by: Contributor X at November 12, 2008 05:11 PM (/Zt8j)

29

"If we call for diplomatic pressure, they call for nothing."

It goes around in a circle. If we call for nothing, they call for somebody to dooooo something!  I distinctly remember both Gore and Kerry saying we should dooooo something about Saddam.   Then we started on Saddam, and it was what about Iran and N. Korea?  As IF they really wanted us to do anything at all about them either.

It's all a friggin game.

 

Posted by: Seer at November 12, 2008 05:20 PM (GdalM)

30 Really, democracy is bullshit.  Letting people vote for whatever they want is not as important as instituting whatever kind of government will secure fundamental individual rights, none of which involve requiring other people or the government to give you things.  In the case of the Middle East, making sure Jews and women are properly armed would be more important than instituting a democratic government.

Introducing: Neo-neoconservatism,
or:  "Guns. Lots of guns."

Posted by: George guy at November 12, 2008 05:36 PM (qwNcw)

31
As far as foreign policies go, it does make for a catchy tune.

I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony

Id like to build the world a home
And furnish it with love
Grow apple trees and honey bees and snow-white turtle doves

Posted by: lotocoti at November 12, 2008 05:37 PM (qw9D3)

32 #9 RiteWingFascist & #14 SarahW:

There's something wacky going on with Verizon.

Posted by: Brendan at November 12, 2008 05:39 PM (saRwI)

33 We call for a troll and they send a retard.

We live in an age of diminished expectations.  There must be belt tightening all the way around.  If you can't buy quality anymore, you'll have to settle for quantity. 

Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 12, 2008 05:45 PM (OqXyp)

34 so then drumbeat the call for:

an all out nuclear war with Iran
a "surge-the-surge" strategerey in iraq
a surge-y surge in afghanistan
unilateral talks with north korea
a flat tax
drilling for oil in the next 6 hours in central park, boston commons, martha's vineyard, palm beach, beverly hills and aspen colorado, (as well as coal mining)

there, i just solved all of our problems.

Posted by: jason at November 12, 2008 06:07 PM (K0h/W)

35 I equate the logic of liberals with that of junior high girls hopped up on hormones and emo.

Posted by: katya at November 12, 2008 06:21 PM (G3frc)

36 WASHINGTON – The Air Force general who runs the Pentagon's missile defense projects said Wednesday that American interests would be "severely hurt" if President-elect Obama decided to halt plans developed by the Bush administration to install missile interceptors in Eastern Europe.

How dare this general tell our Community Organizer in Chief how to defend our country and its allies. Doesn't he know that by gutting our military and letting everyone walk all over us we'll finally know world peace?

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 12, 2008 06:37 PM (9jNH+)

37 Actually, I predicted this some time lat last year.  The Democrat plan, starting with Iraq, has been to support a "bi-polar" regional solution.  They want to sell arms to the Saudi's et al and then giving some political power to the Iranians with cover for their development of nuclear energy/weapons as a counter.

They believe that terrorism from the Sunni and Shia sects are supported by these two entities.  They believe if they maneuver both to face off with each other,it will create a tension and force them to focus their proxies at each other, sunni-shia, Saudi/Iranian instead of at the United States.  Further, it will make the Saudi's even more dependent on the United States for protection.  Sure, they will buy more weapons from us (good for economy) and they will be more willing to accede to our oil and energy needs while we work at "alternative energy" and not tap into our oil reserves off shore or in ANWR.  In short, putting us into a better bargaining position.

Iraq will act as the middle man who will also fear both parties going at each other over Iraq's borders so they will be firmly in our pockets. 

Now, look at that the same in Afghanistan and Pakistan.  They are setting up the great Shia/Sunni split between Iran and Pakistan.  Again, creating tension and the onus for each to want to stabilize the area lest it overflows into their nations.

In other words, we're gone and their proxies are going to turn on them unless they do something to get it under control. 

Now, the potential problems with this is manifold.  First, it assumes that allowing Iran to get a nuclear weapon is a matter of time and presents itself only as an either or situation: military action to interdict or allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon and work on detente or containment policy.  Of course, for all the wailing about Iraq, you can bet that these folks are not going to look Bush's gift horse in the mouth.  They'll be happy to take up where he left off with a Democratic Iraq and a somewhat weak government they can manipulate. 

Unfortunately, it will give Ahmedinejad some credentials for the next election and shore up the horrid Islamist government for decades to come.  But, the Democrats, as Kaus notes, are opting for stability in the region regardless of who is going to be in charge.

Second, it assumes that Iran is, in fact, a rational actor that is currently faced with multiple internal issues from dissent and from financial difficulties.  They will be looking to strengthen their position considerably.  The Democrats are assuming that the quad pressure of Israel with nukes, Iran with Nukes, Pakistan with Nukes and India with Nukes will act as some sort of Cold War type deterrence amongst all those who are desirous of surviving.  It might even act to solidify the wobbly Pakistani government who will be faced with an enemy on each side.

Obviously, there are those of us who are somewhat concerned about Iran as a rational actor or that Pakistan will stabilize and not fall to the radical Islamist elements.  Maybe they don't even care if that is the fact because then it will change the Islamists from guerrillas with limited assets to lose into a governing body with a country full of assets and everything to lose.  In short, give them what they want and make them have to work for it.  In some regards, you can understand the thought process, but it is a continuation of the idea that all of these groups are either rational actors or will become rational actors once they have something to lose. 

Finally, as a Democrat fellow once explained to me, even if these two still go at it with proxies across the middle east, it won't be any different than it has been to date and the US will simply have to work harder on creating a defense at home to keep terrorists out.  As if we have nothing to physically fear from a bunch of nuclear nut cases.

I think the other thing that concerns people like me is that, with all this nuclear proliferation going on, Obama is still talking about cutting missile defense systems, slowing future combat system development and not replacing aging nuclear weapons.  The idea of going detente with nuclear enemies and then slowly dismantling our own and leaving us defenseless does not sit well at all. 


Posted by: kat-missouri at November 12, 2008 06:43 PM (GxnBZ)

38 The PRESSSident will set foreign policy, not Obama.   Ditto for most of the rest of what Obama does.   It's why they worked so hard to elect him -- he will let the PRESSSSident take charge.  They known since the beginning he's largely an empty suit who can be easily programmed to make a great speech on most anything they've pre-tested as good for the public and PRESSSSident.

If the PRESSSident wants war, we'll get war,
If the PRESSSident wants something blown up, something will blow up,
If the PRESSSident wants to ignore something, it will get ignored,
If the PRESSSident wants a bailout, it will get a bail out,
If the PRESSSident wanst to shut up it's opponents in talk radio, the Fairness doctrine will be dumped on talk radio.

This isn't rocket science.

Posted by: drfredc at November 12, 2008 07:01 PM (JbxXM)

39 You forgot, if we call for nothing, they call for giving money and other goodies. If we call for money, they call for more money, with no strings attached.

Posted by: MlR at November 12, 2008 07:40 PM (PLmsY)

40 It's morning in Asia and I've had a cup of coffee to start the day off. Why are you all surprised by this? When have Democrats ever supported democracy abroad? Their shtick has been a strongman is better than a democrat. Yawn!

Posted by: indga at November 12, 2008 09:00 PM (YfUcD)

Posted by: uuvcvbv at January 15, 2009 08:34 PM (U5xPH)

Posted by: google排名 at August 11, 2009 09:24 PM (KUnwh)

43 Some people like LV handbags,Some people like Chanel handbags,but most popel have been keeping an eye on cheap fashion brand handbags .we often talk about all kinds of designer handbags with my friends,most of my friends also like cheap fashion brand handbags.We admire cheap fashion brand handbags designer who often be able to design so many stylish handbags.We want to be a handbag抯 designer in the future too. In our store onlineyou can buy all series of cheap fashion brand handbagsinclude: Louis Vuitton,LV Luggage,LV Wallets,LV Agendas,LV Belts,LV Shoes,LV Accessories,Gucci,Gucci Wallets,Gucci Shoes,Marc Jacobs handbags,Marni handbags,Miu Miu handbags,Mulberry handbags,Prada handbags,Thomaswylde handbags,TOD handbags,Bottega Veneta handbags,D&G handbags,Dior handbags,YSL handbags,Coach handbags

Posted by: steve at October 15, 2009 04:41 AM (+aWy4)

Posted by: retailike at October 17, 2009 02:16 PM (zFgZJ)

Posted by: fdsfds at October 27, 2009 07:56 PM (8kvkz)

Posted by: airforceoneshop at November 03, 2009 08:46 PM (LHCCE)

Posted by: reviewups at November 06, 2009 07:20 AM (XxrVz)

48 Come to our website for shopping with high quality and best service! There have new products,MBT M. Walk
and MBT Lami,Welcome everybody to buy it.

Posted by: mbt shoes at November 08, 2009 03:04 PM (QhfLM)

Posted by: ugg boots at November 12, 2009 09:56 AM (IeIJx)

50 buy [url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-coquette-casual-shoes-c-22]ugg rainier[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]buy ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg usa[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-short-c-1]ugg 5825[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-sundance-c-5]ugg sundance[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-tall-c-3]ugg 5815[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg uk[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-knightsbridge-c-27]ugg knightsbridge[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]womens ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg australia[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-cardy-c-2]ugg 5819[/url]from usa

Posted by: cheap at November 14, 2009 11:05 AM (s7MB5)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 03:40 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 12:01 PM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 10:00 PM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 07:55 AM (C/zDM)






Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0306 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0063 seconds, 63 records returned.
Page size 71 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat