Republicans Saying “Obama’s Weakness” Led to Russia’s Action in Ukraine Don’t Know What the Hell They’re Talking About

pres-obama-1I’ve already grown tired of Republicans who are using the situation in Ukraine as yet another reason to try to levy some kind of attack on President Obama.  They will literally blame anything and everything on Obama.

The biggest talking point Republicans have been using against the president is that his “weakness” toward Russia (because he had the lofty goal of trying to improve relations between the two nations) is what leads countries to make such bold moves.  Essentially saying that because Obama is weak, that’s why Russia sent troops into Ukraine.

If that’s the case, then why did Russia send troops into Georgia in 2008?  You know, when George W. Bush was president?  He started two wars and invaded a nation that had not provoked (or threatened) the United States – are Republicans saying Bush was “weak” when it came to his use of military force?

Let’s not forget the thirteen U.S. embassies that were attacked while Bush was president.  That averages out to almost two per year.


And, of course, it wasn’t long after Bush took office that this country endured its largest terror attack in history.

Heck, let’s go back to George H. Bush and Iraq attacking Kuwait.  I guess that was weakness on Bush’s part too, right?

During Reagan’s administration the Iran-Iraq war started.  Was that because Reagan was weak too?

But Obama’s “weakness” is what led to Russia sending troops into Ukraine?

It’s just laughable that Republicans are actually trying to blame Russia’s brazen move as some kind of reflection of Obama’s foreign policies.  That somehow “Obama being weak” is what suddenly prompted the Russian president to send troops into Ukraine.

The fact of the matter is, power-hungry egomaniacs like Putin don’t care about what Obama (or anyone else for that matter) thinks of what they’re doing.

Do these Republicans really think Putin sat in his office thinking to himself, “I should send troops into Ukraine because Obama is weak!”

If they do, they’re absolute idiots.

Besides, wasn’t it just a few months ago when Obama came out and said he was ready to use military force in Syria?  A move which prompted Republicans to throw a hissy fit over the fact that he might dare to use military force without congressional approval.  But we all know how that played out.

So, they complained when he threatened to use force in Syria, now they’re complaining that his “weakness” is what led to Russia sending troops into Ukraine.

Republicans think Obama is too weak, far-left liberals think Obama is a warmonger for his use of drones in the war on terror.

In my experience, when the far-left is saying you’re too quick to use military force and the far-right is saying you’re too weak – you’re probably doing something right.


Ignoring the reality that Russia did this with Georgia in 2008, before Obama was president, and has a long history when it comes to Ukraine.  So if Obama is “weak,” that must mean they’re suggesting Bush was even weaker.  Considering not only did Russia send troops into Georgia but we experienced our worst terrorist attack in history and thirteen of our embassies were attacked while he was president.

But again, they’ll complain about Obama no matter what he does.  I really believe if he cured cancer they’d say he was trying to put cancer researchers out of work.

Republicans are just a bunch of warmongering neanderthals who don’t seem to have any idea how actual diplomacy works.  They’re the epitome of shoot first, ask questions later.  Heck, just look at their stance on guns.

I have faith, just like we’ve seen in the past, that when all is said and done Obama will once again make Republican look like absolute fools.  Though I admit that’s not really all that hard to do.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Gary Menten

    Did the US do anything militarily when the Russians crushed the Hungarian Revolution in 1956 or the Czech Spring in 1968? No, because there was nothing to be done short of starting WWIII. Did that make Dwight Eisenhower or Lyndon Johnson weak? No, it proved they were sane.

    • Darkthunder

      And besides, while the events in Ukraine are tragic, there is nothing to gain on the US part in intervening (sending troops). It’s not like they can use Bush Jr’s excuse of “protecting our homeland”.

  • Marilyn Olsen Scheffler

    Isn’t it amazing that Obama has such absolute world wide power to control every situation around the entire globe?? How convenient to have him to blame for everything that happens! For a so-called “ineffective President” he certainly does wield a lot of control!!! I am so sick of these people I could throw up! In case you can’t figure it out, this is all sarcasm!! Except for the blaming Obama part—–that is the truth!!

    • Sandy Greer

      Take that ‘nausea’ to the polls with you in November 2014.

      And again, in 2016.

      Vote ’em the Hell outta Dodge!

  • strayaway

    While I prefer Obama’s stance on the Ukraine to that of neocon Republicans, don’t forget that here is a growing constitutional libertarian movement within the Republican Party more opposed to renewing the cold war with Russia. It’s the larger neocon faction including Rubio and McCain who are making provocative fool statements about including Ukraine in NATO to get into Putin’s face.

    “The Ukraine has a long history of either being part of the Soviet Union or within that sphere,””I don’t think it behooves us to tell the Ukraine what to do. I’m not excited about saying ‘hey, let’s put the Ukraine in NATO’ to rub Russia’s nose in it.””Some on our side are so stuck in the Cold War era that they want to tweak Russia all the time and I don’t think that is a good idea,” -Rand Paul

    The EU is more populous, has a larger GNP, and is closer to Ukraine than the US is. Let the EU set the course instead of getting into another foreign policy mess and further bankrupting ourselves. If the US supports any EU initiative, then maybe, just maybe, we could tag along.

  • The free market
    system in Russia began twenty-five years ago and in that time span Moscow has
    become the city in the World inhabited by the largest number of billionaires.
    Vladimir Putin is among the top earners in that nation, but how? The fact is
    that Russia is ruled by a consortium of corrupt gangsters who were, at one
    time, upper echelon officers of the KGB. Putin is no diplomat. Instead, he is a
    Russian mafia don. A full twenty-five percent of the Russian economy is
    siphoned off by corrupt government officials. Everything they have learned
    about capitalism was the result of interactions with American advisors
    beginning with Donald Regan’s team during the Reagan administration. One basic
    principle of this system involves using the military to protect capital
    investments. This is the American way. Starting with Gorbachev, Russia was
    instructed to divest it’s non performing assets and to fortify it’s cash cows.
    Like all other wars in the past this conflict will be about money and real
    estate and not democracy. One must bear
    in mind that these billions previously mentioned are expressed not in rubles
    but in American dollars. How is this
    possible? Simply stated, these
    “government officials” are on someone’s
    payroll.

  • williswinning

    The author of this article is just as stupid as the Tea Baggers he’s accusing of being stupid. This isn’t Putin being a power hungry egomaniac. This is him protecting Russian interests from American interference. Western Ukraine deposed the elected government while the East still wants the government they voted for. Fearing Ukrainian military action they asked Russia for support, they obliged. They didn’t invade. They were invited.

  • Albert Bodie

    This
    is about the United States and Russia fighting over Ukraine’s financial
    future and its resources. For Russia it is also strategically keeping a
    close neighbor loyal. The protestors wanted a government that supported
    more economic trade to the west. If anyone thinks this is about
    democracy in the Ukraine, then surely you believe that was the true
    motivation in the Iraq war? If this was going on in a third world
    country in Africa we would barley hear about it.

  • Sandy Greer

    Well, that’s the Party of Personal Responsibility for you. No, seriously, they think Obama is personally responsible for all the ills in this world.

    Putin is leader of his country, on the world stage. He didn’t get where he is today without having the Will to do what is necessary to advance his cause. He, alone, is responsible for what he is doing in the Ukraine.

    Bush ‘misread’ Putin, when he looked into his eyes, and saw his ‘soul’.

    RWNJs are despicable Haters; it’s just not a good day if they can’t get a ‘hate’ on for any/everything Obama.

  • Akinyele Sanchez Brandley

    Putin was going to invade Crimea no mater who was in the White house! What did Bush do when Russia invaded a part of the Republic of Georgia? Right! Nothing! What did the Reich-wing say then?Right! Nothing!