Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Gretl
Lv 6
Gretl asked in Politics & GovernmentElections · 1 decade ago

For all those who really believe Obama stands for change?

Consider this. Is this really "change"?

He has plans to go into Pakistan. This, fundamentally, is not "change" he is talking about.

On July 26th,2007 Barack Obama said, “I don't want a continuation with Bush-Cheney. I don't want Bush-Cheney light. I want a fundamental change."

On August 1st, 2007 Barack Obama said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

Taking unilateral military action into the territory of a sovereign nation does not really sound like a “fundamental change".

Even if this were to be the policy, publicly stating it shows a profound lack of understanding of the political situation within Pakistan. The United States publicly entering Pakistani territory would at best undermine the relationship with a country that provides vital logistical support for the mission in Afghanistan. At worst it could have the ramification of creating political conditions causing the nuclear power’s government.

Update:

Do we really need another President on training wheels?

Update 2:

critterd, you need to understand foreign policy a little better and what is happening in the world.

16 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Down girl! The pain from the lobotomy will go away in a few weeks.

  • 1 decade ago

    Every new president is "on training wheels". Even Hillary would be as the world has changed since Bill was in office. Things that were true in 2000 might not be in 2009.

    There is a reason why the qualifications for the job are limited, the time span in office is limited, and the powers are in somewhat checked --- the founding fathers knew it was a job you could never do anything to prepare for and anyone coming in would have to figure it out on the job.

    The reality is his response was a fair one for that time span even though it was too Clintonian for my tastes. Alot has changed in Pakistan over the last 6 months. Today I would guess that his response to that question would be entirely different.

  • 1 decade ago

    I do think there is some inconsistency between his stance on pulling out of Iraq and determining to take issue with Pakistan. Could it be that he was trying to play up to the Republicans a bit?

    Myself, I don't trust him. He reminds me alot of Bush with his reliance on charisma over policy. And you are right, it is no change. Bush talked trash about Iraq and then invaded, now Obama is talking a bit of trash about Pakistan.

    When are our leaders going to stop getting caught up with other countries affairs and focus on rebuilding ourselves?

  • 4 years ago

    Eh, no longer possibly. yet greater so than the different practicable applicants. You for the a practicable "replace" candidate as quickly as, then p.c.. the subsequent one and the subsequent one till you exhibit to the government which you incredibly need replace. It would not take place in one election. it incredibly is how conservatives took over. it incredibly is how the moderates and liberals will might desire to do it, too. after all, Ron Paul might have stood for replace... even nonetheless it grew to become into mindless, poorly theory out replace. replace for the sake of replace is not any sturdy. there's a reason so few human beings voted for him.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    come on.... You can't actually be eating up the words that you're writing....

    everyone knows that Obama is a huge fan of diplomacy. I didn't like the way that he referred to "enemies" in yesterday's speech, but i think that he was probably just using the word to decipher between those who like the U.S. and those who don't.

    So, this point you speak of does not phase me......

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I guess we need someone more experienced like Joe Biden who agreed with Barack on every one of those points.

  • 1 decade ago

    Funny thing is is that we recently did exactly what he suggested. You're twisting his words: we aren't going to send ground troops and tanks and lay siege to Islamabad, we'd do a catefully-targetted bombing or special forces raid.

  • 1 decade ago

    ABC - Anybody But Hillary. That's the only change we need. No more Clinton/Bush dynasty.

  • 1 decade ago

    YEAH...RIGHT...Hes in LA-LA Land...trying to be a MLK...and people are buying this. Im a liberal think Im gonna vote MCCAIN

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I have no problem with what he said, and i agree with it.

    If the existing politicians were as rational we would have Bin Laden caught by now.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.