Obama Admin. Says They Totally Won’t Be Bullied By Russia

Too late for that

(Washington Post) Blindsided by the unexpected swiftness of Russia’s air attacks in Syria, the Obama administration scrambled Wednesday to retake the diplomatic and military initiatives, saying that it would not be bullied into supporting President Bashar al-Assad and that it was about to significantly expand its own Syrian air operations.

After spending much of the day together here behind closed doors, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, said in terse evening statements that U.S. and Russian military officials would meet, perhaps as soon as Thursday, to “deconflict” their operations in Syria.

Remember, early on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton referred to Assad as a “reformer”. Obama has had years to force Assad out. He established his “red lines”, then, when Assad crossed them, Obama retreated and attempted to shift control over to Congress. What, exactly, do they do now? Does this give Obama the out in escaping the Middle East, like he has seemed to want for a long time? Of course, this means a loss of influence in the ME for the U.S., with Iran and Russia increasing their influence.

What else is Obama to do? If he doesn’t support Assad (which, personally, I prefer he didn’t), does he throw his support behind the rebels, whom Russia is apparently bombing (instead of ISIS), which would bring US forces into conflict with Russia? Does he continue to (supposedly) bomb ISIS in Syria? Which could still bring US air forces into conflict with Russian forces? Does he wash his hands of the whole mess? Sadly, Obama has put the US in a position to be bullied by Putin/Russia. Whatever happened with that Crimea and Ukraine?

Fortunately, the Washington Post provides a little humor with the article, though it’s not apparent whether this is intentional or not, with a video of SecState John Kerry

Perhaps they should have started the video at a different spot. But, then, we all feel this facepalmy way about Obama’s foreign policies.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

14 Responses to “Obama Admin. Says They Totally Won’t Be Bullied By Russia”

  1. Does anyone ever question if meddling in the affairs of others makes us safer?

    It’s seems to me that for every “enemy” we defeat, we create two new ones.

    Does anyone realize that our foreign policy today mimics that of Great Britain during the time we separated ourselves from them as colonies? I believe George Washington was the most “in the know” regarding creating the proper foreign policy.

    Does any American care about history and avoiding mistakes of the past, or are we just like children who don’t care about lessons of history and just think we know better than those before us?

    You can argue and debate with me or others about the need for an inteventionalist foreign policy, but it will be a waste of time because children don’t reason very well and don’t care about historical lessons. Children will lead us into war forever until the adults finally step in and take over.

    It may take a financial collapse of the USA before the adults show up again in this country.

  2. If you are going to act like a pussy weakling, you shouldn’t be surprised when some people treat you like a pussy weakling, which is exactly what Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is doing to Barack Hussein Obama.

  3. drowningpuppies says:

    It’s seems to me that for every “enemy” we defeat, we create two new ones.

    Oh, like Germany, Japan, and Italy?
    Talk down to me about history.

    • WWII is a direct response to a direct attack to us here at home.

      What weave done since WWII is nothing more than playing chess with the rest of the world in hopes to avoid another World War.

      As far as I can tell, it has been costly and has not brought us any closer to world peace.

      Trying to compare our assault on Germany, Japan and Italy in order to discredit
      My worlds just shows your ignorance to what I am talking about.

      If in fact we treated every encounter as we did with Germany, Japan and Italy we wouldn’t have these issue with Putin today. So how about we talk about the issues with the interventionist foreign policies of America rather than acts of self defense as was WWII.

      Thank you.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Hey dipshit, you made the statement.
        It’s seems to me that for every “enemy” we defeat, we create two new ones.

  4. I love how the squabble is about a dick swinging contest.

    As I recall, Russia made a grave mistake trying to intervene in the affairs of the Middle East during the Cold War and then they went financially broke as a result.

    We followed their mistake by rolling on in as liberators and political reformers to stabilize the Middle East. And now we spend a good portion of our military budget on the Middle East alone. Leaving us less defended on other fronts should there be an attack.

    No Putin wants to bring back the glory days of the former union and repeat the mistake in the Middle East.

    What part of acting like children did I miss in my other post?

    If Obama, or any other president is going to be measured by how big their dick is compared to Putin, we have not learned anything as a nation over the last 200+ years. Especially recent history.

    There is nothing new about the foreign policy of the neoconservative. It is old world bull crap that destroys nations internally.

    When will we wise up?

    I don’t give a shit if we have a weak or strong president in regards to Putin, because Putin is a nobody and should be treated as such. If he wants to get his dick stuck in other people’s business, let him expose himself. We should not at all.

    We are better off utilizing free trade and mutual respect. And if someone attacks our homeland, we desimate them in one day to show the world we are the most dangerous country in the world if you tresspass. The maneuvering bull crap is wasting our valuable time and resources focusing on defense and military innovations.

    Our strength should come from our swift and deadly strike like a snake, but only if you step on us here at home.

  5. david7134 says:

    Just a little fyi, Japan attacked us in direct response to the economic shutdown that was directed at them from FDR. It really was there only option and FDR was well aware of this. He was warned by his military people that Japan would not have any other option than to attack our Pacific interest in order to relieve themselves of the boycott on oil and other materials. Hitler then declared war on us, partly because he was align with Japan as an ally, but likely as well because we were actively involved in sinking his ships, nations really get pissed off when you do those things.

    As to what is going on now with Putin, he sees a vacuum created by the profound weakness of Obama. I really think his move into Syria to be extremely smart. His first objective is to strengthen the existing government, which is something we should have done. Then he will eliminate organizations like ISSI. In doing so, he will have Iran and Iraq in his pocket as he will be the power house in the area. This will then bring on SA and the other oil producers. He will then be the major distributor of oil to Europe, putting him in the top dog seat. He has really done a number on our great president and his group. It leaves them with few options other than war.

    • I don’t disagree with your statements. If you are going to thrust yourself into a region as the great stabilizer you must remain committed to that task. Obviously Obama has an alternate agenda elsewhere and regarding other priorities.

      The issue we have is that we always seem to create these vacuums around the world which end up destabilizing an area worse than before we got there. We also have a bad habit of training of funding groups who in turn become a problem for us later on down the road.

      We inadvertently create our biggest enemies with our own money. Doesn’t seem smart to me.

      We used to follow a humble foreign policy for most of our history and it did us well and is partly responsible for our position in the world today as the leading superpower. Just seems like we have been squandering all this away in the last 20-30 years with all this radical neoconservatism.

      Seems like after the Cold War we went nuts because we didn’t have a nation state to fight with…. But now we have the never ending war on terror…. So that should satisfy the neocons for the next 100-200 years I guess.

  6. Haha, calling me dipshit and once again quoting me just as you did before does not make your argument any more valid than before.

    When you take in consideration that the context of my debate is in regards to foreign intervention rather than simply self defense from attack you would understand this.

    But maybe context is not important to you, and there is nothing I can do or say that will ever make sense to you then.

  7. drowningpuppies says:

    No, dipshit. Your “context”, just as your statement, came through loud and clear and is lacking any substance or validity.

  8. Well I guess you are pretty dense then. I’m sorry about your affliction. Hope the best for you.

  9. Jeffery says:

    Have we been bombing targets in northern Iraq and Syria because Putin is a pussy weakling? Have we been killing Taliban in Afghanistan because Putin is a pussy weakling? Did we kill bin laden because Putin is a pussy weakling?

    Did Shiite militia kill Americans in Beirut because Reagan was a pussy weakling? Did the Iranians kill 241 US Marines and other service members there because they sensed the pussiness weakness in Reagan following the embassy attack?

    Did bin laden attack on 9/11 because he thought W was a pussy weakling?

    Why do so many Americans die when “tough guys” like Reagan, Bush and Cheney are in charge? I think the cowboy swagger of faux toughs like those three city boyz invites hostility. After all Reagan invaded both Grenada AND Panama!

    So what would youse guys do in Syria? lol

  10. drowningpuppies says:

    The Panama invasion occurred during the George H.W. Bush administration in December 1989.

  11. Blick says:

    BHO and Hillary purposefully destabilized the middle east — Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq. Putin is taking advantage of that to extend Russian influence which has been Russian policy for centuries. BHO has little influence and power to project into the Middle East. BHO will withdraw. jon carry has been betraying the USA for 50 years; he won’t stop now.

Pirate's Cove