FORUMS > News & Politics Forum Rules

Missile defense: Obama tells Medvedev more flexibility after election. Romney responds. Rove: reelection damage. New video.

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 12:50 PM GMT
    As Joe Biden would say, "This is a big f ---ing deal."

    Foreign policy outside of the mid-east doesn't get too much attention here, but it will be made a significant issue in the election. Back in 2009 (link below from CBS) Obama unilaterally scrapped a missile defense shield for Europe as part of a "reset" of relations with Russia. He did this without demanding a quid pro quo from Russia, such as insisting they halt certain military systems exports to Iran or support sanctions. This unilateral action was seen by many to be a naive gaffe, demonstrating weakness. It was also done in a way that embarrassed our allies, again part of a pattern.

    Along those same lines, his statement to Medvedev suggests more of the same, and indicates he knows his future actions would be unpopular with a large segment, so he wants to conceal his motives until after the election. It also shows how Obama is very willing to inject politics and his own personal ambitions into foreign policy. Country first? No, Obama first. No surprise to many of us, but this will be excellent material for the election.

    He has also indicated interest in reducing our nuclear force by 80%. Would this also be unilateral, not requiring a quid pro quo from Russia, leaving them with 6,000 warheads to our 300?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/26/obama-tells-medvedev-hell-have-more-flexibility-after-election-during-missile/

    President Obama assured Russian President Dmitry Medvedev Monday that he'd have "more flexibility" after the November election, during a conversation that appeared to focus on the touchy issue of missile defense.

    Obama, during a sit-down with Medvedev in Seoul, urged Moscow to give him "space" until after November. The conversation was relayed by a TV pool producer who listened to the recording from a Russian journalist.

    "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility," Obama told Medvedev.

    Obama appeared to be asking Medvedev to relay this point to Vladimir Putin, who recently won election to return to the Russian presidency.

    "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense ... this can be solved but it's important for him to give me space," Obama said.

    Medvedev told the president he understood the "message about space. Space for you ..."

    After Obama noted he'd have more flexibility in the future, Medvedev told him: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."

    more on site...

    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Obama to Scrap Missile Shield Plan
    http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-202_162-5317088.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 1:32 PM GMT
    JPtheBITCH saidThis is hilarious. From the people who dismiss the President's role in killing Osama bin Laden, but it's Obama who's politicizing foreign policy?

    This goes beyond the usual Republican claptrap. This is out and out dishonesty.

    Dishonesty? Hilarious. His words and actions speak for themselves, in this case in a most obvious way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 1:34 PM GMT
    The delusions are rife this morning...
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 1:47 PM GMT
    omg Obama is a COMMIE!

    You gotta stop that pinko fascist from handing North America over to the Kremlin, who will have all of you working in gulags wearing mind-wipe devices while the rich are stripped down to their undies and made to make pasta by hand!!!!

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:27 PM GMT
    Interesting the responses when shooting blanks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:31 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidInteresting the responses when shooting blanks.


    Well, you started off with a non-story, so why are you surprised with non-responses?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:39 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness saidInteresting the responses when shooting blanks.


    Well, you started off with a non-story, so why are you surprised with non-responses?

    We shall see what a story it turns out to be. I know to many of you it is not a topic you care too much about, but can you imagine the videos in coming months. Military parade of towed rockets in Red Square, watched by the Russian leaders, then an announcer saying "pretty please, pretty please" then Obama begging for more space, more flexibility until after the election. Then "please relay this to Vladimir". Then maybe a scene of him bowing down to some other foreign leader. Non-story, eh?
  • CuriousJockAZ Posts: 18359
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:41 PM GMT
    I just think the comment was inappropriate to make to a foreign leader -- period. Obama should not be feeling too confident right now that he will be re-elected...and even if he does, he should not be voicing that to a foreign leader.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:43 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidInteresting the responses when shooting blanks.
    Uh John. Obama is correct.

    Kinda hard to diplomatically 'deal' (notice the word) on something of that importance when you have no idea if a 'newly elected' president will trash everything you agreed to in 8 months.

    I thought you were more intelligent than that.. the jesus juice is slowly destroying what grey matter you have left
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:49 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness saidInteresting the responses when shooting blanks.


    Well, you started off with a non-story, so why are you surprised with non-responses?

    We shall see what a story it turns out to be. I know to many of you it is not a topic you care too much about, but can you imagine the videos in coming months. Military parade of towed rockets in Red Square, watched by the Russian leaders, then an announcer saying "pretty please, pretty please" then Obama begging for more space, more flexibility until after the election. Then "please relay this to Vladimir". Then maybe a scene of him bowing down to some other foreign leader. Non-story, eh?


    Apparently, you want the Republicans to run their campaign back in the 1950s. When exactly did Russia become a security threat to the US?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 3:57 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidI just think the comment was inappropriate to make to a foreign leader -- period. Obama should not be feeling too confident right now that he will be re-elected...and even if he does, he should not be voicing that to a foreign leader.

    That is an additional point. Most, especially moderates, don't like cockiness, especially regarding something as important as a Presidential election to a foreign head of state. Suspect he didn't realize the mic was on, similar to the guns and religion comment. I think this will be major, making the Etch a Sketch comment by the Romney aide pale by comparison. Will be interesting to see if most of the media outlets even report this, but it will be major.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 26, 2012 5:55 PM GMT
    Has been picked up.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304177104577305182847032866.html?mod=WSJ_World_LEFTSecondNews
    Following Mr. Obama's remarks, the Associated Press reported that Mitt Romney, the leading Republican contender to face Mr. Obama in the U.S. presidential election this fall, said in a statement that the president's unguarded remarks "signaled that he's going to cave to Russia on missile defense, but the American people have a right to know where else he plans to be 'flexible' in a second term."

    Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor who often faces charges of having been flexible on his own policies over the years, said Mr. Obama "needs to level with the American public about his real agenda."


    Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, wrote to the president requesting an "urgent explanation of [his] comments to President Medvedev," AP reported.

    "Congress has made exquisitely clear to your administration and to other nations that it will block all attempts to weaken U.S. missile defenses," Mr. Turner said. "As the chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, which authorizes U.S. missile defense and nuclear weapons policy, I want to make perfectly clear that my colleagues and I will not allow any attempts to trade missile defense of the United States to Russia or any other country."

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-2013-more-flexibility_634474.html
    William Kristol:
    "More flexibility." That means more accommodation to Vladimir Putin's Russia. It also means, I dare say, greater hostility to Israel, and, in general, a second term foreign policy more in line with Obama's original instincts (e.g., the Cairo speech), once he's free of the domestic political constraints that have brought him, to some degree, toward the center.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/26/obama-election-year-plea-to-russia-caught-on-live-mic/
    Obama’s outreach to Russia’s strongmen is intended to avert a showdown at a U.S.-Russia May summit on nuclear weapons. A Russian diplomatic strike on U.S. missile defenses — located in Europe or in Alaska — would force Obama to either abandon the popular missile-defense system or accept an embarrassing diplomatic failure during a political campaign in which he is portraying himself as a global leader.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Found nothing on NY Times, but very surprised that MSNBC covered it. The few comments I read on the MSNBC site were highly critical of Obama
    http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10866962-hot-mike-moment-obama-overheard-telling-medvedev-he-needs-space-on-missile-defense#comments
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 5:57 PM GMT
    Fallout continues:
    http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/27/obama-defends-hot-mic-missile-gaffe/

    President Barack Obama is defending his hot-mic promise of post-election “flexibility” with Russia’s leaders as just another version of his public statements, and is blaming the media for slowing down a deal with Russia.
    ...
    GOP advocates derided his claim. “If O was just stating the ‘obvious’ when he asked Russia for space until Flexibility Day, why did he need to whisper it??” tweeted Ari Fleischer, a former spokesman for President George W. Bush.
    ...
    Obama said that he would have “more flexibility” after the November elections, which critics have interpreted as a sign he may be willing to concede to Russian demands that the U.S. curb or cut its anti-missile defenses in Alaska and Europe.
    ...
    The controversy threatens to damage Obama’s campaign-trail claim that he is a strong advocate for the United States.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-compounds-problem_634739.html

    President Obama's explanation today of his private request yesterday, captured on an open microphone, of Russian president Dmitry Medvedev for some "space" and "flexibility" until after November's election, simply compounds the problem.
    ...
    And Obama insisted his comments to Medvedev were "not a matter of hiding the ball—I'm on record" about wanting to reduce nuclear weapons stockpiles.

    Obama is being disingenuous: His private comments to Medvedev were not about reducing nuclear stockpiles. They were about missile defense: “On all these issues, particularly on missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space,” he said. And Obama didn't just ask for “space” until after Election Day. He promised: "After my election I have more flexibility." So Obama was promising more accommodation to Vladimir Putin's Russia next year, not simply reiterating his commitment to nuclear weapons reduction.
    ...
    Obama's new comment is also revealing. What does Obama mean by saying that the current environment isn't conducive to "thoughtful consultations" with the Pentagon, as well with Congress? Obama is, it seems, suggesting he'll be able to override military advice more easily once he gets past the election. That's good to know. And that his consultations with the Pentagon fall for Obama into the same category as negotiations with congressional leaders from the other party. This is revealing—and scary.

    Finally, Obama doesn't seem at all aware of how inappropriate his whole line of discussion with Medvedev was. It's one thing to acknowledge election year imperatives when discussing domestic issues at home. It's quite another to do so when discussing foreign policy with a foreign leader.
  • GQjock Posts: 11643
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 6:08 PM GMT
    Goodness Gracious ....... Obama actually talked to the Rusian Premiere and told him frankly how the American political system worked

    Aaaaaiiiiiieeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!

    Still is a fact that this President has done more to get loose Nukes secured than all the republican Presidents combined

    NYET?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 9:25 PM GMT
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/27/why-obamas-open-mic-slip-could-seriously-hurt-his-reelection-hopes/?intcmp=trending
    By Karl Rove
    Why Obama's open mic slip could seriously hurt his reelection hopes

    Excerpts only:

    By telling Mr. Medvedev and his patron, the once-and-future Russian President Vladimir Putin, that he will have “flexibility” after the American election on Russian demands opposing a US missile defense for Europe, Mr. Obama is in effect saying he is ready to do something the Russians will like but that the American people won’t.

    Mr. Obama has shown Russian leaders, and now the entire world, weakness.

    He’s willing to bend to the demands of America’s international rivals as long as his appeasement becomes public only after he’s safely back in the White House for a second term. But he is apparently unwilling to share with the American people his “flexibility” with the Russians, perhaps concerned about the criticism such concessions to Moscow might draw from America’s European allies.

    The effects of Mr. Obama’s remarks in Seoul go beyond foreign affairs. If the president believes it is important to his reelection to conceal from Americans his response to Russians demands to halt development of a missile defense for Europe, voters have every right to ask: What other surprises does he plan to spring on us if he’s reelected?
    ...
    Is Mr. Obama also concealing unpopular domestic policies he’ll spring on the country in a second term? What the president calls “flexibility” with Russian autocrats, Americans voters will likely view as a lack of candor with them. If that’s the case, it could seriously undermine the president’s chances for reelection.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 9:28 PM GMT
    I love when John posts Karl Rove's op-eds as if there's any relevance to them.

    Yes. I'm sure the mic slip "hurt Obama's reelection chances" with whatever percentage of Americans are still fighting the Cold War...
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 11:31 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidI love when John posts Karl Rove's op-eds as if there's any relevance to them.

    Yes. I'm sure the mic slip "hurt Obama's reelection chances" with whatever percentage of Americans are still fighting the Cold War...

    You missed the whole point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 11:34 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidI love when John posts Karl Rove's op-eds as if there's any relevance to them.

    Yes. I'm sure the mic slip "hurt Obama's reelection chances" with whatever percentage of Americans are still fighting the Cold War...

    You missed the whole point.


    Nope. You're struggling - as the right wing media is - to find a point to an offhand comment by our president to one of our international allies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 27, 2012 11:51 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidI love when John posts Karl Rove's op-eds as if there's any relevance to them.

    Yes. I'm sure the mic slip "hurt Obama's reelection chances" with whatever percentage of Americans are still fighting the Cold War...

    You missed the whole point.


    Nope. You're struggling - as the right wing media is - to find a point to an offhand comment by our president to one of our international allies.

    Maybe things just don't process with you, but if you saw the points I originally made, the points Romney made, and the points Rove made, you would see the significance. But it doesn't matter.

    Just an aside - One of the "highly esteemed" RJ members likes to say we get our talking points that we just parrot. My immediate reaction was prior to them making their points, and I also provided context of his 2009 pull out. So you'll read it here first.

    Maybe this international stuff is boring to some of you, but when campaign ads come out along with speeches, the possibility of him appeasing our adversaries and selling out the US will be major. It will have a visceral effect among the patriotic, naive folks, and you won't like it one bit. It was a comment he never intended to be public and it clearly reinforced an aspect of his policies that will be very damaging.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 28, 2012 12:16 AM GMT
    I think this type of talk is great--I'm glad Obama said this.

    Too often during election seasons war hawks crank up the rhetoric and red herrings in order to win political points (case in point: tensions over Iran and Israel and politicans pandering to AIPAC).

    It's good to know that politcians can be honest with other world leaders when they no longer have to throw around "red meat" to drum-beating voters.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 28, 2012 12:27 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidI love when John posts Karl Rove's op-eds as if there's any relevance to them.

    Yes. I'm sure the mic slip "hurt Obama's reelection chances" with whatever percentage of Americans are still fighting the Cold War...

    You missed the whole point.


    Nope. You're struggling - as the right wing media is - to find a point to an offhand comment by our president to one of our international allies.

    Maybe things just don't process with you, but if you saw the points I originally made, the points Romney made, and the points Rove made, you would see the significance. But it doesn't matter.

    Just an aside - One of the "highly esteemed" RJ members likes to say we get our talking points that we just parrot. My immediate reaction was prior to them making their points, and I also provided context of his 2009 pull out. So you'll read it here first.

    Maybe this international stuff is boring to some of you, but when campaign ads come out along with speeches, the possibility of him appeasing our adversaries and selling out the US will be major. It will have a visceral effect among the patriotic, naive folks, and you won't like it one bit. It was a comment he never intended to be public and it clearly reinforced an aspect of his policies that will be very damaging.


    John - I read Rove's piece before you posted it. I heard Romney's speech before you cited it. It's all a bunch of horseshit.

    Apparently, you, Rove and Romney are trying to re-litigate the Cold War. The problem is that you're alone in that.

    Rove's group already has every possible Obama quote taken out of context playing all over the country. It doesn't matter.

    No one on your side likes or is excited by Romney. He's your Bob Dole. Your John Kerry.

    The right had it's entire fight based on the economy, which - despite every attempt by Republicans to sink it - is coming back. And because you're deranged by your irrational hatred for Obama, you can't see that the majority of Americans like him. And they don't like Romney. Sure, some conservatives will hold their nose and vote for him, but not enough to counter the genuine enthusiasm that Obama generates from his supporters. And not enough to overcome the vast majority of of independents being disgusted with the GOP and with "reversible Mittens."

    But keep pretending that you're brighter than everyone while we laugh our way to the polling places in November.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 28, 2012 12:54 AM GMT
    conscienti1984 saidI think this type of talk is great--I'm glad Obama said this.

    Too often during election seasons war hawks crank up the rhetoric and red herrings in order to win political points (case in point: tensions over Iran and Israel and politicans pandering to AIPAC).

    It's good to know that politcians can be honest with other world leaders when they no longer have to throw around "red meat" to drum-beating voters.








    You sure got this right !!!!!

    Additionally that goddamn Rove was part of a massive 40 + Neo Con effort under Bush to take us to war with Iraq based on lies, their entire scheme has been discredited all the way around and why in hell would any informed credible person use Rove as an authority on anything having to do with Foreign Policy ? He's the last person to take advise from !!!


    It seems to me that Rove and all the Neo Cons in the Repub party are hell bent on finding as many enemies as possible including Russia and China so they can keep their favorite Military Complex buddies rich and the money flowing from them for their elections.


    Here again RON PAUL's non internventionist Foreign Policy is more like what the US needs to adopt.

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 28, 2012 1:01 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidApparently, you, Rove and Romney are trying to re-litigate the Cold War. The problem is that you're alone in that. ...

    The economy and his performance will obviously be the main factor, but this has nothing to do with re-litigating the cold war. The fact which you fail to understand is we have friends and adversaries in the big world, and it is questionable whether Obama has any interest or ability to defend our interests. His comments also suggest he wants to keep things hidden from the American public until after the election. Points will be hammered home and even though they mean nothing to you, they will resonate very strongly with the mainstream public. Just watch.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 28, 2012 1:22 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidApparently, you, Rove and Romney are trying to re-litigate the Cold War. The problem is that you're alone in that. ...

    The economy and his performance will obviously be the main factor, but this has nothing to do with re-litigating the cold war. The fact which you fail to understand is we have friends and adversaries in the big world, and it is questionable whether Obama has any interest or ability to defend our interests. His comments also suggest he wants to keep things hidden from the American public until after the election. Points will be hammered home and even though they mean nothing to you, they will resonate very strongly with the mainstream public. Just watch.





    Such desperation to make a problem where there isn't one SOCAL !!! Why ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Mar 28, 2012 1:30 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidApparently, you, Rove and Romney are trying to re-litigate the Cold War. The problem is that you're alone in that. ...

    The economy and his performance will obviously be the main factor, but this has nothing to do with re-litigating the cold war. The fact which you fail to understand is we have friends and adversaries in the big world, and it is questionable whether Obama has any interest or ability to defend our interests. His comments also suggest he wants to keep things hidden from the American public until after the election. Points will be hammered home and even though they mean nothing to you, they will resonate very strongly with the mainstream public. Just watch.


    The Russians are not our adversaries. Are you getting your news from a 1968 edition of Time Magazine?

    And his comment had nothing to do with the American people and everything to do with the douche bags in Congress.