Obama "vows retaliation" against Russia

[melvinmelvin]

12 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The FBI position is not what you state.

 

 

yes, you are right their position has changed, not long ago

[Grubster]

22 hours ago, lucky11 said:

 

 Maybe, but he won't be victorious in this one.

 

 What is all the fuss about - Obama said that he wanted his government to be more transparent than any before. Surely, releasing information that should be out there in the public domain is a good thing regards this. If Clinton had nothing to hide she needn't worry. If what was revealed caused her to lose the election when she was absolutely nailed on to win it, then what was revealed in those emails must have been more than a tad dodgy!! Everything about her was dodgy anyway (especially her scam foundation) and I am glad that Trump won and seems to hold little regard for all of the 'president speak' nonsense. 

 Let us have a conviction President that is not subservient to big pharma, big food and corporate interests.

 

He said the right things about big business, loop holes, outsourcing, etc.  If he turns back on that tough talk, then I will know we just have another politician.  We need to hold his feet in the fire on those promises. 

[captspectre]

20 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The threats made by Obama are silly, if perhaps sort of customary under such circumstances. A wuss? Would you be happier with him starting a real confrontation with Russia?

I would be happier with his sorry ass gone! there are other ways to get russias attention without war! but hitting them with your purse is not the way!

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.   Please stick to the topic of this thread.  

[Morch]

11 hours ago, Nasrullah said:

What are you on about morch?......where does moral judgement come into it!...he is stating an opinion!

 

He explained himself in that whistle blowers are mostly in-betweens.

 

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/958938-obama-vows-retaliation-against-russia/?page=6#comment-11432394

[Morch]

2 hours ago, captspectre said:

I would be happier with his sorry ass gone! there are other ways to get russias attention without war! but hitting them with your purse is not the way!

 

There's no war, and you haven't made it clear which sort of response would be appropriate.

[Strange]

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

History doesn't excuse Russian authoritarian Putin's aggressive attempt to interfere with the liberal democracy of the U.S.A. which tragically he has succeeded in weakening. 

 

Whats with this "Liberal Democracy" 

 

You guys got your own version now? Its not THE liberal democracy its OUR democracy. You are just a liberal in OUR democracy just like I'm a conservative in OUR democracy. 

 

Man im cringing over here reading that. 

[Strange]

16 hours ago, Morch said:

Why hasn't the Obama regime noticed this before?

 

Eh? Not as if this is the first instance these issues came up.

 

But it was just Putin trolling us before, now, after the election, its something that requires retaliation. 

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

[Thakkar]

On 12/17/2016 at 10:21 AM, lucky11 said:

 

 Maybe, but he won't be victorious in this one.

 

 What is all the fuss about - Obama said that he wanted his government to be more transparent than any before. Surely, releasing information that should be out there in the public domain is a good thing regards this. If Clinton had nothing to hide she needn't worry. If what was revealed caused her to lose the election when she was absolutely nailed on to win it, then what was revealed in those emails must have been more than a tad dodgy!! Everything about her was dodgy anyway (especially her scam foundation) and I am glad that Trump won and seems to hold little regard for all of the 'president speak' nonsense. 

 Let us have a conviction President that is not subservient to big pharma, big food and corporate interests.

 

 

Great! Now let's see some transparency from president elect Trump, starting with his tax returns as a way to show he will have no conflicts of interest, and then maybe he could explain how his proposed "blind trust" will actually be blind.

 

in fairness, we should also ask Russia to hack Trump's emails and release them to the public at large. If he has "nothing to hide, he has nothing to fear."

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

But it was just Putin trolling us before, now, after the election, its something that requires retaliation. 

 

And if Obama was to respond this way during the election campaign it would have been construed and criticized as as trying to influence the outcome. As said earlier, if this was indeed a Russian play, brilliant timing.

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

And if Obama was to respond this way during the election campaign it would have been construed and criticized as as trying to influence the outcome. As said earlier, if this was indeed a Russian play, brilliant timing.

I think the refugee crisis was also a play by Putin to disrupt Europe.  Yes, a brilliant play.  Sadly, it's caused massive suffering.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I think the refugee crisis was also a play by Putin to disrupt Europe.  Yes, a brilliant play.  Sadly, it's caused massive suffering.

 

Not exactly on topic - but if I had to guess the situation is Europe is not as contrived as suggested. Would have been way too complicated to predict how it will pan out, especially with a wildcard like Erdogan in the mix.

[simple1]

21 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I think the refugee crisis was also a play by Putin to disrupt Europe.  Yes, a brilliant play.  Sadly, it's caused massive suffering.

 

To be fair the ground swell of asylum seekers into the EU was created well before Russian active military involvement with Assad. Organisations such as UNHCR had raised red flags fairly early on due to the under funding of support services, you could say complacency, by some countries. On the other hand there have been reports from NATO and others suggesting the involvement of Russian intelligence in recent years; some examples talking to this concern.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/russia-and-syria-weaponising-refugee-crisis-to-destabilise-europe-nato-commander-claims-a6909241.html

 

http://observer.com/2016/04/how-the-kremlin-manipulates-europes-refugee-crisis/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/05/russia-refugee-germany-angela-merkel-migration-vladimir-putin

Edited December 18, 2016 by simple1

[Strange]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

And if Obama was to respond this way during the election campaign it would have been construed and criticized as as trying to influence the outcome. As said earlier, if this was indeed a Russian play, brilliant timing.

 

Just like the FBI and that statement James Comey made & its potential effect on HRC during the campaign. Damned if you do and damned if you don't but for the sake of integrity he should have been transparent at the time. Not make a big fuss about it now. 

[Morch]

26 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

Just like the FBI and that statement James Comey made & its potential effect on HRC during the campaign. Damned if you do and damned if you don't but for the sake of integrity he should have been transparent at the time. Not make a big fuss about it now. 

 

You do recall how Comey's comments were received, right? And you do accept, I hope, that his conduct was controversial (even allowing that he was at an impossible situation). Obama making such statements during the election campaign, without being able to present solid proof (either for not having it or for national security issues) would have been way worse in terms of reaction.

 

If he would have, the Russians could mark a result regardless of their intervention being real or not. The impact on US would have been huge. And that's while an already heated  election campaign was on.

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

2 hours ago, Strange said:

 

Whats with this "Liberal Democracy" 

 

You guys got your own version now? Its not THE liberal democracy its OUR democracy. You are just a liberal in OUR democracy just like I'm a conservative in OUR democracy. 

 

Man im cringing over here reading that. 

 

I realize that the Trump fanboys celebrate ignorance but this astounding demonstration of obliviousness is appalling. So hidebound by partisan ideology that even the most basic concepts are recast in political bigotry. What now, do we get rid of the word democracy because it is too similar to the word Democrat?

 

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/liberal-democracy

 

Some people need to really get a grip on reality.

[Strange]

10 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

I realize that the Trump fanboys celebrate ignorance but this astounding demonstration of obliviousness is appalling. So hidebound by partisan ideology that even the most basic concepts are recast in political bigotry. What now, do we get rid of the word democracy because it is too similar to the word Democrat?

 

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/liberal-democracy

 

Some people need to really get a grip on reality.

 

Im cringing over here reading this too. 

 

Im not ever going to get a grip on your reality. 

[CharlieK]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

What are you on about?

Obama knows history.

trump knows branding trump. 

This isn't about that.

History doesn't excuse Russian authoritarian Putin's aggressive attempt to interfere with the liberal democracy of the U.S.A. which tragically he has succeeded in weakening. 

 

Rubbish! US democracy was/is ruined by the politicians. This whole fiasco is about the Hilary emails, not about Russia trying to interfere with the vote.

 

Obama says as much in this press release. Having told Putin to cut it out back in September, Obama says they did not see any interference in the election, though the emails were already released into the public domain.

 

 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38349989

[Strange]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

You do recall how Comey's comments were received, right? And you do accept, I hope, that his conduct was controversial (even allowing that he was at an impossible situation). Obama making such statements during the election campaign, without being able to present solid proof (either for not having it or for national security issues) would have been way worse in terms of reaction.

 

If he would have, the Russians could mark a result regardless of their intervention being real or not. The impact on US would have been huge. And that's while an already heated  election campaign was on.

 

Of course, thats why I used him as an example. Imho is conduct was absolutely not "controversial" as he was doing his job even if it meant his own downfall but I can see how some would see it otherwise. Its better to release the info when you get it, rather than to hold onto it. If HRC would have won, and only then did the statements come out, that would have been worse. It could be spun to look like the FBI itself was interfering in the elections by withholding information for the benefit of a candidate. 

 

I know what you are saying but the White House could have kept the press updated on the investigation from beginning to end without getting super partisan about it. It looks way worse getting loud about it after Trumps unexpected win and putting his name all over it. 

 

Im sorry but I just do not think that the White House was/is/are doing what they are doing because its "Better" for everyone. 

 

Edited December 18, 2016 by Strange

[alocacoc]

I can only laugh at this. The super duper USA with their uber-super duper NSA which spying everything around the globe got hacked by the Russians? If so, do your homework USA.

 

I don't know if Trump will be a decent president, but it's time for a change.

[Rimmer]

A flame and personal attack has been removed

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

 

Of course, thats why I used him as an example. Imho is conduct was absolutely not "controversial" as he was doing his job even if it meant his own downfall but I can see how some would see it otherwise. Its better to release the info when you get it, rather than to hold onto it. If HRC would have won, and only then did the statements come out, that would have been worse. It could be spun to look like the FBI itself was interfering in the elections by withholding information for the benefit of a candidate. 

 

I know what you are saying but the White House could have kept the press updated on the investigation from beginning to end without getting super partisan about it. It looks way worse getting loud about it after Trumps unexpected win and putting his name all over it. 

 

Im sorry but I just do not think that the White House was/is/are doing what they are doing because its "Better" for everyone. 

 

 

Comey had two instances for which he was criticized (well, maybe more, depends how and who is counting) by one side, and hailed by the other, with roles reversing between the two occasions. So "not controversial", is probably relating to one of them, but not both.

 

I don't know how the White House could have updated the press about the investigation without getting partisan or being perceived as being partisan. For one thing, if the subject of the investigation involved Russian intervention in favor of one candidate (or putting it in another way,  against one of the candidates), the partisan angle would not be possible to avoid. Also, considering how many perceive the media as partisan, can't see how their reporting would have been taken otherwise.

 

But this is hindsight - the White House, for whatever reason, decided to air this after the elections. Even if you think that this wasn't the correct way to go about it, would you rather have it kept from the public at this point?

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, alocacoc said:

I can only laugh at this. The super duper USA with their uber-super duper NSA which spying everything around the globe got hacked by the Russians? If so, do your homework USA.

 

I don't know if Trump will be a decent president, but it's time for a change.

It's not so much the spying by Russia which is expected, but the WEAPONIZING of the information gained from spying done by Russia to specifically help one candidate win the election over another. 

[onthesoi]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's not so much the spying by Russia which is expected, but the WEAPONIZING of the information gained from spying done by Russia to specifically help one candidate win the election over another. 

 

Of course the US would never stoop so low as to hack anyone or rig/influence another country's election to suit their own ends.....

 

Karma is a bitch, suck it up!

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, onthesoi said:

 

Of course the US would never stoop so low as to hack anyone or rig/influence another country's election to suit their own ends.....

 

Karma is a bitch, suck it up!

Not going to "suck up" to American democracy being threatened by Putin, trump, or anyone else. We're entering the trump era ... and now we need to see if American democracy will survive it. 

[wajuc]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

It's not so much the spying by Russia which is expected, but the WEAPONIZING of the information gained from spying done by Russia to specifically help one candidate win the election over another. 

Thanks for that.  I didn't know the truth was a weapon in the West.  Thailand maybe.  How long have you been here? 

[Nasrullah]

56 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Not going to "suck up" to American democracy being threatened by Putin, trump, or anyone else. We're entering the trump era ... and now we need to see if American democracy will survive it. 

you never had democracy in the first place...well since 9/11 more so.Two parties-the bloods and the crips!

(aka the democrats and the republicans)...Politcians are just there to make you think you have a choice.

 

America needs to find true democracy-not survive it!

 

Whatever you(ie we) think of trump,at least he seems to be trying to get the US back in shape.Your a dyed in 

the wool democrat jingthing.Everybody can see that,and you will never change

 

[JetsetBkk]

Someone leaked the Democrats’ and the Clinton campaign’s private work, and the government has a duty to find the person or entity that did so, even if it was one of the government’s own. Though the truthful revelation of private facts may have altered some voters’ attitudes, there is no evidence that it altered ballot totals. The law guarantees fair elections, not perfect ones.

 

Did the Russians hack Hillary Clinton? No. No one did. But some American intelligence agents helped WikiLeaks to expose much dirty laundry.

 

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.

 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/12/15/judge-andrew-napolitano-did-russians-hack-hillary.html

 

 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, wajuc said:

Thanks for that.  I didn't know the truth was a weapon in the West.  Thailand maybe.  How long have you been here? 

Truth. You're a funny one.