Jedno sasvim novo i drugačije Presidency..

[Roger Sanchez]

Barry: ''I need a wartime secretary!''

[Gandalf]

Barry: ''I need a wartime secretary!''

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/11/hagel-joint-chiefs-pentagon-113171.html

[Prospero]

matori pat o obami
 

Obama Cuts Loose Old Alliances
By Patrick J. Buchanan • April 14, 2015, 12:05 AM
 

 


At the Summit of the Americas where he met with Raul Castro, the 83-year-old younger brother of Fidel, President Obama provided an insight into where he is taking us, and why: ”The United States will not be imprisoned by the past — we’re looking to the future. I’m not interested in having battles that frankly started before I was born.”

 

Obama was not yet born when Fidel rolled into Havana, Jan. 1, 1959. He was 1 year old during the missile crisis. His mother belonged to a 1960s generation that welcomed the Cuban Revolution. His father came from an African generation that won independence from the European empires.

Churchill’s bust may have resided in the Oval Office of George Bush. Obama sent it back to the British Embassy. His hero is Nelson Mandela, who overthrew centuries of white rule in South Africa. Obama is as rooted in the Third World as in the West, and his goal is to sweep out the clutter of a Cold War that “has been over a long time.”

He lifted sanctions on Burma, is recognizing Castro’s Cuba, and hopes to seal a nuclear deal with Iran and normalize relations. Uninhibited by old friendships, untethered to old allies, Barack Obama is grounding his Middle East policy on what he sees as the new realities. And the policy shifts he is making are unlikely to be reversed, for the discarding of old friends in altered circumstances is an American tradition.

In 1954, Eisenhower refused to intervene to save our French allies going down to defeat in Indochina. In 1956, he ordered the British and French out of Suez. That was the end of Prime Minister Anthony Eden, Ike’s wartime friend, and of the British Empire, alongside which we had fought two world wars.

In 1963, JFK sanctioned a coup against our ally President Diem.

In 1972, Richard Nixon went to Peking to toast Chairman Mao, who was responsible for tens of thousands of U.S. war dead in Korea. Nixon thus began the severing of relations and of treaty ties with our World War II ally, Chiang Kai-shek, and his Republic of China on Taiwan.

What Ike was conceding at Suez was that the British and French empires were history and Arab nationalism was the future in the Middle East. What Nixon was conceding was that Mao’s revolution was irreversible, and America must deal with the new reality.

Obama is in that tradition of ruthless American pragmatism.

Three weeks after the Arab Spring reached Cairo, he pulled the rug out from under Hosni Mubarak, an ally of 30 years. Then he welcomed the electoral triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood. Now he has accepted the coup d’etat and subsequent electoral victory of Gen. Abdel Fattah el-Sissi, and his emerging Egyptian dictatorship.

What is the new reality Obama sees across the Middle East?

It is that America’s most dangerous enemies are al-Qaeda and its progeny, and ISIS in Syria and Iraq. And in the war against al-Qaeda and ISIS, the Ayatollah’s Iran and its allies—Hezbollah, Syria’s Bashar Assad and Iraq’s Shiite militias—are on our side.

However, in this same war, some of our oldest allies appear to be conscientious objectors or collaborators with the enemy.

As Joe Biden said at Harvard a while back, the Turks, the Saudis and the Emiratis provided much of the money and arms that initially fueled the Nusra Front (al-Qaeda) and ISIS in Syria. Biden was forced to apologize for having told the truth.

Where ISIS has made Syria’s provincial capital of Raqqa the capital of its caliphate, the Nusra Front has seized Idlib, a second provincial capital. And the Assad regime accuses our NATO ally Turkey of aiding and abetting the terrorist takeover of Idlib.

The Israelis, too, do not share our view of who is the mortal enemy. “Hezbollah and Iran are the major threat to Israel, much more than the radical Sunni Islamists,” says Amos Yadlin, ex-head of Israel’s military intelligence. Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren agrees: “We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran.”

But if Assad falls, then the Nusra Front or ISIS comes to power, a strategic disaster for the United States, followed by a slaughter of Christians that could drag America back into yet another land war.

Obama is not wrong here. If NATO’s Turkey, Israel, and the Gulf Arabs prefer Sunni Islamists in Damascus to an Alawite regime with which we have coexisted for 40 years, then President Obama is right to move us away from our old allies. U.S. national interests come first.

Yet, a choice between Hezbollah and the Nusra Front, ISIS and the Shiite militias, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and the Houthi rebels, is a Hobbesian trap that is a conclusive argument for keeping U.S. troops out of this war of all against all in the Middle East.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority. Copyright 2015 Creators.com.

[dillinger]

Da, još samo kad bi Obama kontrolisao sve regionalne igrače, priveo ih za pregovarački sto i da zavlada Bliskim istokom hiljadugodišnji mir. Tek koliko je ta promena u interesu Amerike, diskutabilno je. 

 

Kriza u tom delu sveta pokazuje koliko je i Iran daleko od naivnog dobričine, i koliko ima razvijenu regionalnu mrežu i opake pretenzije. Na momente se čini da će šiitska koalicija jedina izaći kao pobednik iz Arapskog proleća naročito nastavi li se borba Rusa i Amera za iransku naklonost. Njihovo jedinstvo i koordinacija su potpuno fascinantni naspram ovih sunitskih tutumraka

 

Regionalne netrpeljivosti ostaju, Iran neće promeniti stav spram zbivanja u Jemenu, Libanu, Siriji, Iraku...ni za mikrometar, štaviše Obamine poteze će tumačiti kao slabost a ne izraz dobre volje. A jedino gore od američke zaleđine S.Arabiji i Izraelu jesu raspojasani nuklearni Izrael i zalivski monarsi.

 

 

Uglavnom, pre će vreme potvrditi republikanska strahovanja oko slabog Obame nego što će Obamu učiniti dostojnim Nobela.

[ObiW]

Regionalne netrpeljivosti ostaju, Iran neće promeniti stav spram zbivanja u Jemenu, Libanu, Siriji, Iraku...ni za mikrometar, štaviše Obamine poteze će tumačiti kao slabost a ne izraz dobre volje. 

 

Americki potezi dobre volje se uvek tumaci kao znak slabosti u tom delu sveta. No, ovo je ipak izuzetak: u Izraelu je upravo pobedio Bibi, koga je neposredno pred izbore Senat pun republikanaca doveo da im se direktno obrati. Iran je razumeo da ako za 2 godine republikanac dodje u Belu Kucu, mogu da ocekuju jos gore sankcije a verovatno usput i bombardovanje nuklearnih instalacija. Medjutim, kako stvari stoje u Senatu, izgleda da je Obama dzabe krecio i da ce protivnici sporazuma imati dvotrecinsku vecinu koju on nece moci da obori predsednickim vetom. 

[Ravanelli]

gledo neko cijelo?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK7tYOVd0Hs

[Ravanelli]

10 dana juna

 

supreme court je ok sa obamacare

supreme court je ok sa gay brakovima

charlestone eulogy & confederate flag

 

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/ten-days-in-june

Edited June 28, 2015 by Ravanelli

[Takeshi]

moglo je i na temu srbin pobedijo.

obama je za podeljenost medija iskoristio termin - balkanization.

(oprostajni intervju kod stjuarta)

 

"Overall, I think the problem with our interaction with the media is overstated," Obama said, adding that with the "Balkanization" of the media it's hard for the country to get one common conversation "around something other than the Super Bowl."

[Lezilebovich]

upravo sam ovo iznad došao da pitam. gledam dailyshow, pa sam čak i premotavao i na kraju se pitam da li je moguće da je balkanizejšn toliko uobičajen da ga čak i Obama koristi  :(

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/full-episodes/skawjk/july-21--2015---barack-obama

Edited July 22, 2015 by Lezilebovich

[Takeshi]

morao sam i ja da guglam, koristio je termn i pre par meseci.

kao kako najbolje da opisem grozotu americkih medija.

 

A lot of it has to do with the fact that the balkanization of the media means that we just don't have a common place where we get common facts and a common worldview the way we did 20, 30 years ago. And that just keeps on accelerating, you know.

 

[Takeshi]

koliko su smesni trenutni kandidati u odnosu na obamu.

predsednik odradio plejlistu za spotify:

(omakli su mu se coldplay, ali to je jedina greska)

 

 

DJ POTUS Curates Playlists For Spotify -- See What Obama is Listening to Lately

Edited August 16, 2015 by Takeshi

[Eraserhead]

The Obama Boom

Paul Krugman, New York Times January 11, 2016

 

Do you remember the “Bush boom”? Probably not. Anyway, the administration of George W. Bush began its tenure with a recession, followed by an extended “jobless recovery.” By the summer of 2003, however, the economy began adding jobs again. The pace of job creation wasn’t anything special by historical standards, but conservatives insisted that the job gains after that trough represented a huge triumph, a vindication of the Bush tax cuts.

 

 

[mandingo]

neverovatno je u kakvu cirliderku se pretvorio krugman (nije da i ranije bio objektivan.) ovo vec poprima fox news i msnbc format partiskog navlacenja.

[hazard]

neverovatno je u kakvu cirliderku se pretvorio krugman (nije da i ranije bio objektivan.) ovo vec poprima fox news i msnbc format partiskog navlacenja.

 

Pa OK, svi znamo na kojoj je Krugman strani. Ali covek lepo pise ovako:

 

 

Does President Obama deserve credit for these gains? No. In general, presidents and their policies matter much less for the economy’s performance than most people imagine. Times of crisis are an exception, and the Obama stimulus plan enacted in 2009 made a big positive difference. But that stimulus faded out fast after 2010, and has very little to do with the economy’s current situation.

 

Sve sto pise u tom clanku je ono sto i inace pise, ne vidim kako je vise cheerleadovanje nego inace.

[mandingo]

nije vise nego inace, niti je poseban slucaj, tacno. radi se o konstantnom partiskom navlacenju... neko bi pomislio da je to ispod casti nobelovca i profe na ivy league univerzitetu. obviously, it's not.