Comments on: Obama's Foreign Policy Too Homeopathic

The New Republic: What Is The Role Of A Conciliating Candidate In An Unconciliating World?

Add a Comment See all 32 Comments
by standlee5 February 13, 2008 4:18 AM EST
Great article, Leon Weisteltier. Sobering.
Reply to this comment
by sparks224 February 13, 2008 3:45 AM EST
"We''''ve just HAD 7 years of incompetency in the White House!"
Posted by RowdyTexan2

It''s actually corruption disguised as incompetence.
There''s a big hole where the Treasury used to be.
Reply to this comment
by tibu987 February 13, 2008 3:40 AM EST
I am confident that should Obama win the presidency, he will, like all presidents have, surround himself with highly intelligent and qualified advisers of all manner of world affairs specialists, economists, military leaders, et al. No one person can be the sole fountain of good deeds and smart decisions, that must be delegated to others. Our hope would be that Obama or whomever wins, will do the same.
Of course, the ultimate decision rests with the President, and the buck stops there.
We have all seen the negative side, the neocons who advised President Bush and how ill-fated and negative and divisive their approach has been. Hopefully, the next President will be a wiser and more intelligent person.
Reply to this comment
by cbs_oliver February 13, 2008 2:12 AM EST
I''m sure that Obama and his advisers are fully aware that deep inside radical right wing organizations there are people planning to kill American freedom and turn America into just another big business plantation.

The New Republic and Leon Wieseltier are part of the problem.

They can''t lead.

They won''t follow.

They need to get out of the way.
Reply to this comment
by rowdytexan2 February 13, 2008 1:33 AM EST
Well said!

It''s good to see an article that raises these questions. The competence level just isn''t there.

For seven years, Bush has riled, killed, and stolen...and Obama just thinks these folks are going to sit down with him and have a love-in.

We took out the Shah of Iran and Iranians were slaughtered. Obama claims he''ll pull the troops immediately. This is naive wishful thinking.

This man can''t even extemporaneously articulate a straight answer on any question regarding policy...all he can say is...I''m going to CHANGE that!

We''ve just HAD 7 years of incompetency in the White House!
Reply to this comment
by closethippy1 February 12, 2008 11:36 PM EST
Obama''s proposal to talk to Syria and Iran is what separates him from all the other candidates. And that''s what enfuriates magazines like the New Republic who''s been pro-anything-Israel-does for the longest time.
We need this kind of change in our foreign policy. The 100,000 Iranians that perished under the dictatorship of the Shah who was put in power by the CIA have got to count for something.
It is arrogant of us to say that those deaths don''t matter and therefore Iran has no reason to be upset with us.
And the treatment Syria has been getting from the US also doesn''t make any sense. They''ve done a great job giving the US a lot of intelligence on Al Qaeda and other terrorists. In fact, most foreign Arab fighters going to Iraq do it from Saudi Arabia and not Syria.
Syria is also secular and modern, unlike those Arab neanderthals from the gulf region.
Try it, for crying out loud try talking to these adversaries for freaking once to see if it makes a difference and let''s stop barking orders at them on Israel''s behalf.
I just hope that if Americans choose Mr. Obama for president they''re smart enough to elect people to Congress and the Senate to help him along.
Reply to this comment
by adiant-2009 February 12, 2008 10:45 PM EST
This is the best definition of pessimism I have ever seen. Let''s pay attention to this great proponent of let everything the way it is, since it has been working remarkably. What a shame! And still worse, he has been given a pen to go around selling politics of fear. And, by the way, what is what he suggest we should do? That I did not find in this "column"!
Reply to this comment
by February 12, 2008 9:00 PM EST
And read this...
http://www.digg.com/politics/Full_text_of_Barack_Obama_s_2002_Speech_Against_the_Iraq_War
Reply to this comment
by February 12, 2008 8:57 PM EST
The New Republic knows better than this....Obama made many of the same points on October 2, 2002 at the Federal Plaza in Chicago:

http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php
Reply to this comment
by taddles-2009 February 12, 2008 7:52 PM EST
Wow, talk about an "if you don''t kill them all they''ll kill you" BS scare tactic. How''s about trying diplomacy for once...I know it requires intelligent thought and that''s not something your going to get from the right wing. You punks are pathetic, it will be such a relief to get your fear mongering drivel out of the mainstream.
Reply to this comment
by bluestardad February 12, 2008 5:52 PM EST
HEY JUST BECAUSE OBAMA WANTS TO GET AMERICA OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST OIL, ISRAELI MONEY PIT DOES NOT MAKE HIM UNFIT OR TOO YOUNG TO LEAD!..

BUSH AND CHENEY ARE TOO IGNORANT TO LEAD!
Reply to this comment
by frogbutt2 February 12, 2008 5:37 PM EST
Now I know why I have never read The New Republic" shooweee!
Reply to this comment
See all 32 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

International recording artist Shakira on love, career and more. Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: