USA Politics

Looking like the NSA spying has expended to the UN and at least 80 embassies. I am guessing this (correctly) will not go over well outside of the US .. and I would hope not well inside the US.
 
What is the general feeling towards this inside the US? Who is the anger and frustration directed at? The White House? The NSA itself? I guess the Patriot Act is what gives the NSA the opportunity to carry out this extensive spying, but opportunity is not enough - somebody have to want to do this. I guess there is a demand for heads to roll, but whose heads?
 
I am guessing all of the above. Blaming the White House probably depends on how you feel about Obama to start with. I can imagine some of his supporters have to feel disappointed that this has not only continued in his Administration, but has also probably expanded since Bush left office.

IMO, the buck for this sort of thing stops with the President. He either had to authorize this or the top people which would be appointed by him had to okay it.

Overall though, you see mixed opinions. Some are fine with this stuff because it "makes us safer", some are appalled that we are spying on our own people and our Allies, and a decent portion are upset the Lamar Odom and whatever Kardashian he is married to might be splitting up.

Obama's numbers amongst younger voters have taken a dive lately and most think it is tied to this sort of thing, so he is paying a price and he has not really made a case for why this should go on. I know he said something about a mixture between liberties and security is needed .. but that was when this first broke, there have been many revelations since then and he has not really responded to them.
 
Generally? Carelessness and general unawareness. It was a big news story for a week maybe but outside of the internet it's really not a big deal. Go figure.

But for those who do care, Obama is really taking the brunt of it. Mostly because he flat out lied and he got caught. He promised to get rid of The Patriot Act and other similar Bush policies, as well as a transparent administration. Not only did he fail to do this, but he expanded those programs and policies. Ridiculous. There's a video (I think it was posted here) comparing two speeches from 2007 and 2013, with him essentially contradicting himself.
 
For the most part, since Iraq/Afghanistan, Americans really don't want interventions in other countries like this. Most people don't want to be involved in another war. It's a low number, but not surprising in the least.
 
So what would be a bigger mistake: Not listening to the huge majority of his people, or not holding himself to his red line speech?
 
The biggest mistake already happened, that was making the red line comment with apparently no intention of backing it up, which has backed the US into a corner. You either have to enforce it having done nothing to try to sell that idea to the American people or ignore it and lose credibility in the future.
 
Honestly I'm not sure. I'm in the camp that thinks we should stay out of Syria, but at the same time Obama made such a big deal out of that red line. Not holding himself to that says a lot about his reliability.

Edit:
bearfan said:
The biggest mistake already happened, that was making the red line comment with apparently no intention of backing it up, which has backed the US into a corner. You either have to enforce it having done nothing to try to sell that idea to the American people or ignore it and lose credibility in the future.
Click to expand...
This is the best answer.
 
I understand the American opinion well. Quite recently, they have seen an example of how bad such an intervention might turn out (Iraq - removing Saddam opened an ethnic-religious can of worms). The Iraq war might easily be seen as the Vietnam of the post-Cold War era. Obama may be delivering on that promise - ending the Iraq involvement - but people don't want another one. One that might cost even more in terms of life, material and money.
 
The US have led two wars in recent years that ended in a disaster. I'd be surprised and shocked if the approval was higher.
 
Neither ended as they could or should have .. but I think disaster is a bit strong. World War II ended in a disaster for Germany, Japan, and France ... Iraq and Afghanistan drug on too long and cost money .. but nothing that will be more than a blip on US History.
 
Forostar said:
So, Mosh and bearfan: Obama can't do right anymore in your eyes?
Click to expand...

A page or two ago, I gave him credit for the Administration changing how they would go after trials for Federal Drug charges.

I am not sure how anyone can say the Red Line statement has done nothing but harm to US Credibility overseas, coupled with the barrage of NSA revelations. One of his big 2008 campaign promises was restoring US credibility overseas. I am not sure how backing off statements (Red Line) and spying on our Allies has helped that .. not to mention spying on Americans
 
It's so tragic to see that a man who can tell visions like Martin Luther King has realized so little in the last years.

I wonder if the contrast was so big with any other President of the past.
 
Forostar said:
It's so tragic to see that a man who can tell visions like Martin Luther King has realized so little in the last 8 years.

I wonder if the contrast was so big with any other President of the past.
Click to expand...
Foro, I was a huge Obama fan. I still think he has the chops to do good. But he ain't no MLK.

bearfan said:
France, the UK, and to a lesser degree are pushing for action in Syria

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-europe-syria-20130826,0,4996897.story

I do not think it is good for the US to not be out in front of this sort of thing and not seeming to care about the use of chemical weapons. That has been a huge no-no since WWI.
Click to expand...

I want NATO to go in and take the situation apart. Call Russia's bluff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top