Is Obama a Socialist?

[IAN 2411]

The US at least for the past 150 years, has known she was by far the most powerful state in its own hemisphere, and full-scale invasion of the mainland or even attempts to exert hard pressure from other countries close by hasn't really been something she needed to take into account.

Give me a break for fucks sake 150 years ago you had just shot Billy the Kid. The Gatling gun had not been invented, The United states was at war with itself Britain ruled the waves and the JFK aircraft carrier was nonexistent. Where the hell did you pick that number from?

Superiority can be taken for granted wide margin,

That was one of the reasons Pearl Harbour took place. [Before you scream at me, I am in no way making fun at a most tragic event in American history] Complacency; thinking that an atrocity such as that could never happen on or near your mainland.

Nobody expects Canada or Mexico to invade, boycott shipping or try to revile the USA in foreign media. Nobody seriously thinks Brazil would make real damage to U.S. interests by some kind of boycott or by forming an anti-American military league.

Nobody expected the London Tube disaster, 9/11, Canary Wharf, Lockerby, but they took place, there is an unwritten rule in the UK Special Forces expect the unexpected.

In Europe, every country has had to adapt to that the neighbour might react, put pressure on you or even invade: everybody's got a history of being pushed in by the others' ambitions, of being invaded and bombed at home, of having your ports mined or your claims questioned by the neighbours. These days they're not going to war with each other but the possibility of mutual pressure, boycotts, responses and backroom politics is still something that can't be escaped. It's simply not possible, certainly not in tense conditions in peacetime, sometimes not during war either to go for the kill at once and talk in a "read my lips" style, unless you're sure the path you're going is fail safe.

The UK has never bowed down to pressure from Europe when it comes to things that matter to us and our closest Allies. The USA ought to be thankful for that fact, because if the UK had not pushed them as hard as the United States were pushing, Sadam would still be in charge if Iraq and Both of our countries would not be over in Afghanistan getting our asses kicked, and for the Brits it is for the second time in history.

In the old days, when Britain, France and Russia felt they were on top of the world, they could act and speak just as bluntly as the American idea is you should do. But those days are long gone, When it comes to intra-European affairs - Bismarck speaking about Britain, in peacetime, and so on - I guess they ended came to an end already in the 19th century.

You really are living in a cotton wool world, just before the fall of the Berlin wall; Britain held the balance of nuclear power in the western world. We still have nuclear subs, and we still hold the balance of power, while you and the Russians were getting rid of war heads Britain retained theirs. So, Discounting the American war heads that you left England with, we are still a force to be counted. In years to come the world will be split into three, Europe, that includes Britain, France and Russia, USA+ South America, and Asia, we will all be dead and gone but let’s hope by then our descendents are not as complacent as you are talking now.
1...Now as for the question about your President, He failed to take charge of the oil spill.
2...He has just sacked General Chrystal Afghanistan’s only expert in counterinsurgency and probably the best in the world, why because his ego was dented. Then to rub salt in the wounds he sent another General to fall on his sword. Why have you got a non combatant as Commander in Chief, running your Military for?
3...His popularity is now down to 45% with a factor of 48% unpopular.
4...He has had the brass neck to tell the rest of the world how to get their economy straight, and if I am not mistaken the cause of all the problems in the first place was Merrill Lynch, Leamans, and Goldman Sax. China holds more American debt than the Americans, and if they pull the plug you will be in the same shit as Europe.

ANSWER, yes he is a Socialist, and just like Europe you will have to put the Conservatives in to get you out of the mire.
Regards ian 2411

[DuncanONeil]

Give me a break for fucks sake 150 years ago you had just shot Billy the Kid. The Gatling gun had not been invented, The United states was at war with itself Britain ruled the waves and the JFK aircraft carrier was nonexistent. Where the hell did you pick that number from?

Seems to me your data is more off than the originators.
Invention of the Gatling gun; your going to quibble about ONE year? The war was just getting started. In the nineteenth century Britain's "rule" of the waves was in decline. What is the point of mentioning the JFK?

[IAN 2411]

Seems to me your data is more off than the originators.
Invention of the Gatling gun; your going to quibble about ONE year? The war was just getting started. In the nineteenth century Britain's "rule" of the waves was in decline. What is the point of mentioning the JFK?

Is that the only bit i messed up on?? The JFK was an afterthought, i spent many nights on the JFK 1968-69 and the food on board was great and i just had to give it a mention. LOL

[DuncanONeil]

Is that the only bit i messed up on?? The JFK was an afterthought, i spent many nights on the JFK 1968-69 and the food on board was great and i just had to give it a mention. LOL

[COLOR="rgb(0, 0, 0)"]Well Gagged did say you were off by 20 on Billy the Kid![/COLOR]

[SadisticNature]

Wow I think I finally agree with you on 1 point, its ridiculous for the Americans who caused the crisis to try and dictate to the world how it should be solved.

The rest however I rather vehemently dispute.
Your polling numbers look like data coming off fox news, if you look at the recent gallup poll, Obama is doing acceptably. Are you confusing numbers from a particular state with national numbers?

Regarding the Oil Spill what do you want him to do, nationalize the rig, put in experts and solve it? The problem is that rig didn't meet basic standards regulated by most of the world, but not required by the US anti-regulation party (aka the Republicans who cry communism whenever someone tries to pass a reasonable regulation that tries to prevent a catastrophic oil spill.) Basic equipment that could have prevented the spill was absent from the rig because the US government is one of few in the world that chose not to require it.

As for the sacking of the General, it is impossible to execute policy on the ground when people not only disagree with you but air their grievances publicly. The US has been at war in Afghanistan that the idea they have only ONE counterinsurgency expert for the region is ludicrous.

As for Obama being a socialist, he's to the right of most of the world. His health care plan is far to the right of the plan that Britains convervatives don't dare attack in virtually every other country in the world he'd be in a right wing party. The democrats nominated him in the primaries because he was to the RIGHT of Clinton who was seen as too left to win. Clinton was also seen as a repeat of a Clinton presidency which wasn't accused of being socialist.

[DuncanONeil]

As usual you do not bother to let anyone know to what, or who, you are responding.

That makes it very hard to form a coherent response. Further much of what you say sounds like unsupported "talking points".

Therefore dream on!

Wow I think I finally agree with you on 1 point, its ridiculous for the Americans who caused the crisis to try and dictate to the world how it should be solved.

The rest however I rather vehemently dispute.
Your polling numbers look like data coming off fox news, if you look at the recent gallup poll, Obama is doing acceptably. Are you confusing numbers from a particular state with national numbers?

Regarding the Oil Spill what do you want him to do, nationalize the rig, put in experts and solve it? The problem is that rig didn't meet basic standards regulated by most of the world, but not required by the US anti-regulation party (aka the Republicans who cry communism whenever someone tries to pass a reasonable regulation that tries to prevent a catastrophic oil spill.) Basic equipment that could have prevented the spill was absent from the rig because the US government is one of few in the world that chose not to require it.

As for the sacking of the General, it is impossible to execute policy on the ground when people not only disagree with you but air their grievances publicly. The US has been at war in Afghanistan that the idea they have only ONE counterinsurgency expert for the region is ludicrous.

As for Obama being a socialist, he's to the right of most of the world. His health care plan is far to the right of the plan that Britains convervatives don't dare attack in virtually every other country in the world he'd be in a right wing party. The democrats nominated him in the primaries because he was to the RIGHT of Clinton who was seen as too left to win. Clinton was also seen as a repeat of a Clinton presidency which wasn't accused of being socialist.

[Lion]

As usual you do not bother to let anyone know to what, or who, you are responding.

That makes it very hard to form a coherent response. Further much of what you say sounds like unsupported "talking points".

Therefore dream on!

How about just rebutting the "talking points" instead of being critical on the way he conveyed his opinion?

[DuncanONeil]

How about just rebutting the "talking points" instead of being critical on the way he conveyed his opinion?

Because without the reference of what caused him to say what he did it is difficult to understand what gave rise to what he said.
There are other reasons, more personal in nature, That I choose to reserve.

[leo9]

How about just rebutting the "talking points" instead of being critical on the way he conveyed his opinion?

Since he can't, he's got to find some other response.

[DuncanONeil]

It is kind of hard to respond when he, essentially, refused to provide any reference to the issue his response is related to.
For example; "The rest however I rather vehemently dispute.
Your polling numbers look like data coming off fox news, if you look at the recent gallup poll, Obama is doing acceptably. Are you confusing numbers from a particular state with national numbers?"

Which poll is he talking about? Without that info how would you respond!?!?!