All Things Russia & Ukraine

[Typical Lax Dad]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

Cradle awards points for witty comebacks…. “You are no JFK” …a “big sucking sound” and such….mitty ain’t witty.

Wrongo buckwheat I live in the real world where words and actions by our leaders should mean something?

O’Tay.

[cradleandshoot]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

Cradle awards points for witty comebacks…. “You are no JFK” …a “big sucking sound” and such….mitty ain’t witty.

Wrongo buckwheat I live in the real world where words and actions by our leaders should mean something?

This statement demonstrates you in fact do not live in the real world.

So words and actions have no meaning then when uttered by our leaders in public?? Got it!!

[cradleandshoot]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

Cradle awards points for witty comebacks…. “You are no JFK” …a “big sucking sound” and such….mitty ain’t witty.

Wrongo buckwheat I live in the real world where words and actions by our leaders should mean something?

O’Tay.

Oy vey...

[Typical Lax Dad]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

Cradle awards points for witty comebacks…. “You are no JFK” …a “big sucking sound” and such….mitty ain’t witty.

Wrongo buckwheat I live in the real world where words and actions by our leaders should mean something?

O’Tay.

Oy vey...

[MDlaxfan76]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

I disagree with your opinion here on so many levels. The basic point was that President Obama boxed mittens ears and made him look silly at that point in the debate. I have made the same point about this particular moment in the debate repeatedly. Mittens had a golden opportunity to respond to President Obama's sarcastic reply. He said nothing and I was stunned that he didn't defend his opinion since he was 100% correct in his assessment of the threat posed by Putin. Your trying to defend Obama by making a convoluted argument about the complexities that also include the Chicoms. That is the dilemma posed to any sitting POTUS. They have to simultaneously deal with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and any other number of nations that don't like the US. HRC tried her reset button approach which probably made Putin split his sides open from laughing at such a stupid empty and vapid proposal. Mittens was correct and now there is a horrifying possibility of yet another war in Europe started by yet one more insane leader of a major power.

That's a false mischaracterization of what was said.
Perhaps you just watch the clips of what Obama said and assume that Romney didn't respond?

Here's the actual text: https://www.npr.org/2012/10/22/16343669 ... ial-debate

The topic was Middle East policy, Obama mischaracterized a prior statement of Romney, and that was the basis for Romney's response. He'd said that Russia was a biggest geopolitical "foe", whereas Iran was the greatest "threat".

It was actually a substantive discussion, but Obama is way, way more facile with the rhetoric.
And Romney is a polite guy and generally lets the other person speak...which Obama does a lot of...

My question: who did you vote for ???

I voted for the guy who I thought would make a better President, Romney, not the better debater.

[Farfromgeneva]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

Cradle awards points for witty comebacks…. “You are no JFK” …a “big sucking sound” and such….mitty ain’t witty.

Wrongo buckwheat I live in the real world where words and actions by our leaders should mean something?

This statement demonstrates you in fact do not live in the real world.

So words and actions have no meaning then when uttered by our leaders in public?? Got it!!

You rage about this all the time. Mindfulness. Be in the now.

[Farfromgeneva]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

Cradle awards points for witty comebacks…. “You are no JFK” …a “big sucking sound” and such….mitty ain’t witty.

Wrongo buckwheat I live in the real world where words and actions by our leaders should mean something?

O’Tay.

Oy vey...

Immediately thought of eddie

[a fan]

That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there.

There's more to the clip. Where both men clarified what the other actually meant without the distortions. And both men were right.

Remember this was 2012. Some are trying to pin Romney for being "right" a full decade later, in 2022.

Romney clarified, btw, what he thought America's biggest geopolitical threat was about 20 seconds after the clip eneded.

So even if you pretend 2012 is the same thing as 2022......Romney's didn't "foresee" Russia.

His answer was (drumroll) Iran. And the number of pieces I've seen of late claiming that "Romney was right" about Russia......are flat out lies.

Check the tape, and see for yourself.

[Seacoaster(1)]

McConnell statement on Ukraine and Russia:

“The innocent people of Ukraine have suffered devastating violence and destruction at the hands of Vladimir Putin and his war machine for years. The bloody full-scale escalation that he began one year ago with zero justification is just the latest chapter. The brave and free men and women of Ukraine and their elected leaders have inspired the world with their courage and resolute determination to maintain their sovereignty and freedom in the face of this thuggery.

“As my fellow leading Republicans and I have explained, it is not an act of charity for the United States and our NATO allies to help supply the Ukrainian people’s self-defense. It is a direct investment in our own core national interests. America is a world power with worldwide interests. Our security and prosperity are deeply intertwined with a secure and stable Europe. If Putin were given a green light to destabilize Europe, invading and killing at will, the long-term cost to the United States in both dollars and security risks would be astronomically higher than the miniscule fraction of our GDP that we have invested in Ukraine’s defense thus far.

“Moreover, the U.S. is largely sending Ukraine older weapons from our stockpile. This means that a significant portion of the money Congress has appropriated is going directly to strengthen America’s own defense by replenishing our inventories with more modern versions of these older weapons we have transferred to Ukraine.

“Looking toward our long-term future, the increasingly aggressive threats that we face from China and Iran make it more essential, not less, that the United States and NATO demonstrate strength and resolve today. Prime Minister Kishida of Japan has warned repeatedly that Ukraine’s fate today could be East Asia’s tomorrow if the free world flinches in the face of aggression. He calls the fate of Ukraine and the future of Asia ‘inseparable.’ Likewise, our partners in the Middle East with whom I’ve met this week report that Tehran is also closely watching the conflict in Ukraine.

“It is not enough to do the right things; we need to do the right things at the right speed. The Biden Administration and our allies must act more decisively to ensure that both our collective assistance to Ukraine and the investments we each make in our own militaries take place at the speed of relevance. Every experience tells us it is weakness and hesitation that provoke Putin. The road to peace lies in speedily surging Ukraine the tools they need to achieve victory as they define it.

“I have spent the past week traveling with a number of fellow Senate Republicans to meet with several of America’s closest partners and rally our allies. We have reassured our friends about our nation’s resolve to keep investing in our American arsenal that underpins the collective defense of the whole alliance. At the same time, we have challenged our friends to invest more in defense and shoulder more of the burden themselves. There is a clear path by which a stronger, healthier, more unified NATO can emerge from this crisis stronger than we began it. America and our friends need to finish waking up from our holiday from history, welcome Finland and Sweden into NATO by this summer, and make significant investments in military modernization and our defense-industrial capacities that are commensurate with the major challenges we face.”

[a fan]

McConnell statement on Ukraine and Russia:

“The innocent people of Ukraine have suffered devastating violence and destruction at the hands of Vladimir Putin and his war machine for years. The bloody full-scale escalation that he began one year ago with zero justification is just the latest chapter. The brave and free men and women of Ukraine and their elected leaders have inspired the world with their courage and resolute determination to maintain their sovereignty and freedom in the face of this thuggery.

“As my fellow leading Republicans and I have explained, it is not an act of charity for the United States and our NATO allies to help supply the Ukrainian people’s self-defense. It is a direct investment in our own core national interests. America is a world power with worldwide interests. Our security and prosperity are deeply intertwined with a secure and stable Europe. If Putin were given a green light to destabilize Europe, invading and killing at will, the long-term cost to the United States in both dollars and security risks would be astronomically higher than the miniscule fraction of our GDP that we have invested in Ukraine’s defense thus far.

“Moreover, the U.S. is largely sending Ukraine older weapons from our stockpile. This means that a significant portion of the money Congress has appropriated is going directly to strengthen America’s own defense by replenishing our inventories with more modern versions of these older weapons we have transferred to Ukraine.

“Looking toward our long-term future, the increasingly aggressive threats that we face from China and Iran make it more essential, not less, that the United States and NATO demonstrate strength and resolve today. Prime Minister Kishida of Japan has warned repeatedly that Ukraine’s fate today could be East Asia’s tomorrow if the free world flinches in the face of aggression. He calls the fate of Ukraine and the future of Asia ‘inseparable.’ Likewise, our partners in the Middle East with whom I’ve met this week report that Tehran is also closely watching the conflict in Ukraine.

“It is not enough to do the right things; we need to do the right things at the right speed. The Biden Administration and our allies must act more decisively to ensure that both our collective assistance to Ukraine and the investments we each make in our own militaries take place at the speed of relevance. Every experience tells us it is weakness and hesitation that provoke Putin. The road to peace lies in speedily surging Ukraine the tools they need to achieve victory as they define it.

“I have spent the past week traveling with a number of fellow Senate Republicans to meet with several of America’s closest partners and rally our allies. We have reassured our friends about our nation’s resolve to keep investing in our American arsenal that underpins the collective defense of the whole alliance. At the same time, we have challenged our friends to invest more in defense and shoulder more of the burden themselves. There is a clear path by which a stronger, healthier, more unified NATO can emerge from this crisis stronger than we began it. America and our friends need to finish waking up from our holiday from history, welcome Finland and Sweden into NATO by this summer, and make significant investments in military modernization and our defense-industrial capacities that are commensurate with the major challenges we face.”

DeSantis and any other Republican POTUS candidate is now between a rock and a hard place.....McConnell is now on record for not only supporting BIden....but in now pushing him to give Ukraine the tools to take back Crimea....."as they (the Ukrainians) define victory". They can't show up and play peacenik when asked the question: what would you do about Ukraine and Russia? They have to support Biden.

Kudos to McConnell for his neo-con consistency. At least he's for once, putting his values in front of politics.

[cradleandshoot]

...you can't unring this bell.

Russia's not our biggest threat. It's China,
...& Team Biden's made them Russia's ally.

I always enjoy some of the folks on this forum trying to spin this clip where Obama b***h slapped mittens on the debate stage. I remember watching Obama b***h slap mittens in real time. I remember thinking mittens was just pitched a low hanging curve that he could hit out of the park. Mittens never even took a swing at the pitch. That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there. The only time since then that mittens showed he had any balls left was his universal blue blood Republican attack on the dumpster. Too bad you blue bloods didn't stand by mittens when you had the opportunity. Mittens was 100% spot on with his distrust for the Russians. Today in 2023 the DemocRATs are finally in complete agreement with mittens. Maybe mittens should have called the 80s and asked them for their foreign policy back.

Nobody is talking about Romney but you.

I know, nobody wants to discuss the fact Romney was correct when he chastised the Russian regime. Mittens ineptitude during this back and forth with Obama had much to do with him losing the election. Maybe some of those policies left over from the 80s were not all that bad. I heard on the news this morning that Putin floated a trial balloon about pushing back the borders in Poland. Maybe, just maybe, the conversation should focus on the US ineptitude in how we dealt with Russia after the end of the cold war? If only mittens had pressed Obama what he meant when he said the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back?

Nobody wants to for a bunch of reasons adding up to: it’s irrelevant.

ugh, I'll do it one more time.

Romney's answer was arguably "correct"; Romney correctly identified Russia as the most aggressively malign "geopolitical" player in 2012; Georgia had happened, Crimea was coming shortly, Russia was already aggressively involved in asymmetric interference in democracies with its neighbors especially, Europe and the US generally. We (the general public) only became conscious of this here in 2016, but it was well underway. Moreover, Russia was on the march diplomatically spreading its influence with other authoritarians around the world.

Romney was right about this level of aggressiveness; in comparison, China was far less aggressive in attempting to do damage (but super aggressive in economic competition though IP theft etc). Long term, China's economic ascension is likely to be a larger threat to American influence geopolitically but for the decade ahead of the 2012 election, Russia was the larger threat because of its aggression.

But Obama was also "correct" in that religiously motivated terrorism had recently been and were the most immediate direct threat to American interests abroad.

What cradle seems to think is that Romney shouldn't be respected because he's not an adept orator or debater, nor natural "politician", and was on stage with a generational talent.

I have and had the opposite reaction. While I admired Obama's talents, I was more interested in the underlying thought process and policy view. Unlike much of the media, and apparently cradle, I didn't dismiss Romney's argument simply because he's not as facile a debater and was caught by a verbal zinger and didn't have a comeback. Romney's view was much more involved than that format favored, indeed really needed long format discussion...but our politics don't reward long format.

I don't blame that on Romney, but rather on we voters for not working harder to understand complexity and reward those who do.

But again, Obama was also "correct" in his identification of that immediate direct threat.
His view was validated by the rise of ISIS. That was coming...

I disagree with your opinion here on so many levels. The basic point was that President Obama boxed mittens ears and made him look silly at that point in the debate. I have made the same point about this particular moment in the debate repeatedly. Mittens had a golden opportunity to respond to President Obama's sarcastic reply. He said nothing and I was stunned that he didn't defend his opinion since he was 100% correct in his assessment of the threat posed by Putin. Your trying to defend Obama by making a convoluted argument about the complexities that also include the Chicoms. That is the dilemma posed to any sitting POTUS. They have to simultaneously deal with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and any other number of nations that don't like the US. HRC tried her reset button approach which probably made Putin split his sides open from laughing at such a stupid empty and vapid proposal. Mittens was correct and now there is a horrifying possibility of yet another war in Europe started by yet one more insane leader of a major power.

That's a false mischaracterization of what was said.
Perhaps you just watch the clips of what Obama said and assume that Romney didn't respond?

Here's the actual text: https://www.npr.org/2012/10/22/16343669 ... ial-debate

The topic was Middle East policy, Obama mischaracterized a prior statement of Romney, and that was the basis for Romney's response. He'd said that Russia was a biggest geopolitical "foe", whereas Iran was the greatest "threat".

It was actually a substantive discussion, but Obama is way, way more facile with the rhetoric.
And Romney is a polite guy and generally lets the other person speak...which Obama does a lot of...

My question: who did you vote for ???

I voted for the guy who I thought would make a better President, Romney, not the better debater.

I voted for neither candidate. I don't vote republican out of respect for my mom who hated every Republican that ever walked the planet. I would vote for a Democrat but that party has been hijacked by the extreme FLP folks. I have voted locally for our congressman Joe Morelle. My wife went to HS with him and knows one of his close associates very well. When Joe was in the NYS Senate he always looked out for his constituents were I live in East Irondequoit. Joe was born and raised here. Congressman Morelle graduated to DC where sadly he has become yet another flunky of the Democrat party. Sorry to digress but I would have preferred Romney over BHO. If you ask me if Romney ever impressed me... he did until that blunder on his part on his last debate with BHO. I understand that you think I make a huge deal over this. That blunder turned off many voters because they perceived him as inept and unwilling to get in Obama's grill when he mocked him. That was the point in time when Mitt Romney looked weak and indecisive on the issue of how serious a threat Russia was. That was in the same period of time when BHO was caught on the hot mike explaining how he could be more " flexible" negotiating with the Russians in his next term. maybe another brand spanking new reset button would have sealed the deal.

[a fan]

maybe another brand spanking new reset button would have sealed the deal.

The irony of that admittedly stupid Reset button is: if Putin wasn't an overcompensating macho-man, and had taken up Hillary's offer?

Picture how much further ahead the Russian people would be....instead of waaaaay behind, like they are now.

Trade with the US transformed and improved the lives of a whole mess of Chinese citizens over several decades.

[cradleandshoot]

That clip, much to the consternation of MD lax is why I lost all respect for mittens. He had a very rare opportunity to call out Obama. Mittens lost the election right then and there.

There's more to the clip. Where both men clarified what the other actually meant without the distortions. And both men were right.

Remember this was 2012. Some are trying to pin Romney for being "right" a full decade later, in 2022.

Romney clarified, btw, what he thought America's biggest geopolitical threat was about 20 seconds after the clip eneded.

So even if you pretend 2012 is the same thing as 2022......Romney's didn't "foresee" Russia.

His answer was (drumroll) Iran. And the number of pieces I've seen of late claiming that "Romney was right" about Russia......are flat out lies.

Check the tape, and see for yourself.

So Iran and Russia are not and never have been entwined in the one thing they have in common... their hatred and contempt for the United States of America. I suppose in the grand scheme of things how do you rate the 3 most prominent threats to the United States

1) Russia

2) China

3) Iran

In no particular order which nation was the biggest threat to freedom and world peace in your opinion. A steak dinner if you can figure that one out. Was the potential threat from either 3 any less in 2012?? You can read into the dialogue between Obama and Romney all you wish. What doesn't change us that BHO mocked Mitt Romney by what he said. What is left out and I paraphrase is Obama also mocking Mitt about the cold war being over and a vague observation about the social policies of the 1950s and the 1930s. All were fair observations by President Obama said during the context of a presidential debate. All Mitt Romney had to do was defend his opinion. The POTUS called him out and at no point in time did Mitt Romney defend his opinion. IMO he didn't want to come across as being critical of what BHO said. What after all is the objective of a presidential debate? You want to express your opinions and have a lively conversation with your opponent on the merits of such. Was there ever suppose to be a meeting of the political minds as to which country was the biggest threat to America circa 2012??? Fast forward to 2023. There is a horrible possibility that the war in Ukraine is going to drag Europe and the US into another war that nobody wants. If the news blurb I saw on the news this morning is true... Putin wants to move back the borders in Poland. What I see a Fan is a train heading full steam towards the edge of the cliff and nobody wants to apply the breaks.

[a fan]

So Iran and Russia are not and never have been entwined in the one thing they have in common... their hatred and contempt for the United States of America. I suppose in the grand scheme of things how do you rate the 3 most prominent threats to the United States

1) Russia

2) China

3) Iran

In no particular order which nation was the biggest threat to freedom and world peace in your opinion. A steak dinner if you can figure that one out.

I'll take that steak dinner.

The answer is 4. America itself. We stopped compromising, solving problems, and working on improving the lives of working class Americans a few decades ago. And unless we pull out sh(t together and bring America into the 21st century, freedom and peace will go bye-bye.

There is a horrible possibility that the war in Ukraine is going to drag Europe and the US into another war that nobody wants. If the news blurb I saw on the news this morning is true... Putin wants to move back the borders in Poland. What I see a Fan is a train heading full steam towards the edge of the cliff and nobody wants to apply the breaks.

Yep. This is EXACTLY why I was the only one cheering when Obama did NOTHING militarily about Crimea. And the R's were calling him soft, because of his stupid little D. It drives me NUTS that our country's evaluation of the things we do is ENTIRELY based on the letter by our leader's name. So sick of it. As much as I can't stand Hillary, at least she had the intellectual honesty to vote to invade Iraq based on the case Bush made, instead of the letter by his name.

Trump kept his powder dry for a while. And then caved to who the heck knows, and sent arms and training to Ukraine. It's clear as day that that's what prompted Putin's invasion: he invaded before Biden's promised coming aid that would bolster what Trump already sent.....took that option away from Putin entirely.

[cradleandshoot]

So Iran and Russia are not and never have been entwined in the one thing they have in common... their hatred and contempt for the United States of America. I suppose in the grand scheme of things how do you rate the 3 most prominent threats to the United States

1) Russia

2) China

3) Iran

In no particular order which nation was the biggest threat to freedom and world peace in your opinion. A steak dinner if you can figure that one out.

I'll take that steak dinner.

The answer is 4. America itself. We stopped compromising, solving problems, and working on improving the lives of working class Americans a few decades ago. And unless we pull out sh(t together and bring America into the 21st century, freedom and peace will go bye-bye.

There is a horrible possibility that the war in Ukraine is going to drag Europe and the US into another war that nobody wants. If the news blurb I saw on the news this morning is true... Putin wants to move back the borders in Poland. What I see a Fan is a train heading full steam towards the edge of the cliff and nobody wants to apply the breaks.

Yep. This is EXACTLY why I was the only one cheering when Obama did NOTHING militarily about Crimea. And the R's were calling him soft, because of his stupid little D. It drives me NUTS that our country's evaluation of the things we do is ENTIRELY based on the letter by our leader's name. So sick of it. As much as I can't stand Hillary, at least she had the intellectual honesty to vote to invade Iraq based on the case Bush made, instead of the letter by his name.

Trump kept his powder dry for a while. And then caved to who the heck knows, and sent arms and training to Ukraine. It's clear as day that that's what prompted Putin's invasion: he invaded before Biden's promised coming aid that would bolster what Trump already sent.....took that option away from Putin entirely.

I believe our founding fathers advised us as a nation not to get involved in wars in Europe. There is huge sympathy in America that supports the people of Ukraine. The only thing I see is a path that leads our nation into the abyss. Sooner or later tanks and artillery and rocket launchers graduate to American boots on the ground. Where I live the support for Ukraine is very strong. Those yellow and blue flags are all over the place. For some reason no matter how many weapons the US sends to Ukraine it will never be enough. I have no idea where this war ends but I hope both sides realize very soon this conflict is useless and futile. I'm not optimistic in the least.

[old salt]

Maybe he’s not lying and this is how the thought process is inside that dome. Maybe you’re giving him too much credit on cognitive ability at this point? All the evidence points to a fairly binary answer undoubtedly.

Project much ? You're workin' really hard to get your money's worth from your therapy $$$'s.

[old salt]

Nah cradle, Obama wasn't soft on Russia. Watch'em spin this one.

[a fan]

Nah cradle, Obama wasn't soft on Russia. Watch'em spin this one.

Nothing to spin. He was soft. That's the whole thing. I cheered it. You, hilariously, didn't.

Fast forward to 2022, and you completely changed your mind about having a light hand with Russia.

I think it's spectacular that you're on here.... post invasion, after MONTHS of complaining about "Biden's" unnecessary war.....STILL claiming how Obama handled Putin and Russia was wrong.

Neat. Any other intellectually bankrupt claims you'd like to make? Something about Obama's "wrong" tan suit or something?

[old salt]

Trump kept his powder dry for a while. And then caved to who the heck knows, and sent arms and training to Ukraine. It's clear as day that that's what prompted Putin's invasion: he invaded before Biden's promised coming aid that would bolster what Trump already sent.....took that option away from Putin entirely.

Putin began massing troops on the border in Apr '21. He made a big increase in Dec '21.
Biden held off sending aid until the CIA told him that Putin was going to invade, not bluffing.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/12/16/us ... delay-aid/
White House Delays Moving Military Assistance to Ukraine
And Congress is getting impatient.
DECEMBER 16, 2021,
Frustration mounts in the U.S. Congress over President Joe Biden’s Ukraine policy...

[old salt]

Nah cradle, Obama wasn't soft on Russia. Watch'em spin this one.

Nothing to spin. He was soft. That's the whole thing. I cheered it. You, hilariously, didn't.

Fast forward to 2022, and you completely changed your mind about having a light hand with Russia.

I think it's spectacular that you're on here.... post invasion, after MONTHS of complaining about "Biden's" unnecessary war.....STILL claiming how Obama handled Putin and Russia was wrong.

Neat. Any other intellectually bankrupt claims you'd like to make? Something about Obama's "wrong" tan suit or something?

Although I still recognized Russia as a potential threat, I wasn't for being hard on Russia then.
I was laughing (& still am) at the critique of Trump for being soft on Russia.

As I've said several times before (every time you use that canard). FTR -- I thought Obama looked sharp in that tan summer suit.
My differences with Obama were on substance (policy & execution), not style.