Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Caught on video: Horrifying proof that Libya's freedom fighters have turned into brutal torturers [View all]sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)93. That is not the quote I am talking about.
From 'Audacity of Hope':
I agree with George W. Bush when in his second inaugural address he proclaimed a universal desire to be free, Obama wrote. But there are few examples in history in which the freedom men and women crave is delivered through outside intervention.
And I am not going to go searching for it now, but he expanded on that in a question and answer session after a speech he gave in 2007 when asked if he supported Humanitarian Intervention by using the miliatary. His answer was no, that he did not. However when asked again later in the campaign, maybe even that year, he had changed his mind. That change was attributed to his association with Samantha Powers:
It's true Obama doesn't have a long record of foreign policy stances. "He's not fully formed," argues the conservative military historian (and Obama supporter) Andrew Bacevich. "The paper trail is thin," says Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. Nonetheless, the candidate's views are not hard to discern. He believes the United States makes itself safer by promoting "dignity" in other nations through diplomacy and foreign aid. He also believes crumbling societies and failed regimes such as Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe must be confronted by the international community, including the United States, before they ignite and become threats. And while he sees Iraq as a "dumb war," he's game for smart warfare in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Obama's views started to crystallize when he came to Washington. The new senator fished around for foreign policy talent and scheduled a brief dinner with Samantha Power, a professor at Harvard's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy and the author of the 2002 book "A Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide. The dinner went on for hours. Soon Power was taking a weekly shuttle from Boston to Washington to tutor Obama on foreign policy.
Power believes the United States creates long-term problems when it fails to intervene in failing states or to protect threatened populations. "Security for Americans at home and abroad is contingent on international stability," she writes in "A Problem from Hell", "and there is perhaps no greater source of havoc than a group of well-armed extremists bent on wiping out a people on ethnic, national, or religious grounds." That is what Obama now believes.
Obama's views started to crystallize when he came to Washington. The new senator fished around for foreign policy talent and scheduled a brief dinner with Samantha Power, a professor at Harvard's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy and the author of the 2002 book "A Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide. The dinner went on for hours. Soon Power was taking a weekly shuttle from Boston to Washington to tutor Obama on foreign policy.
Power believes the United States creates long-term problems when it fails to intervene in failing states or to protect threatened populations. "Security for Americans at home and abroad is contingent on international stability," she writes in "A Problem from Hell", "and there is perhaps no greater source of havoc than a group of well-armed extremists bent on wiping out a people on ethnic, national, or religious grounds." That is what Obama now believes.
http://reason.com/archives/2008/09/19/obamas-wars
So he supported Humanitarian Intervention 'through diplomacy and foreign aid'. But once he hired foreign policy advisers, he began to change. Although even then, his statements were vague when he spoke about intervention
And I'm not the only one who noticed the changes in his stances on foreign intervention. Steve Clemons also was disappointed and clearly remembered as I do, his original position of intervention by diplomacy and foreign aid rather than military intervention:
Steve Clemons, director of the American Strategy Program at the center-left New American Foundation, has watched with mounting disappointment as Obama clarifies his stance on foreign interventions. "He's not the Obama we thought he was," Clemons says.
Clemons, not alone among liberal foreign policy analysts, believes Obama listens to two groups of experts: liberal interventionists and "progressive realists." The latter group, rattled by the Iraq war, agrees with one of Obama's most traditional homilies from his memoir The Audacity of Hope: "There are few examples in history in which the freedom men and women crave is delivered through outside intervention."
Clemons, not alone among liberal foreign policy analysts, believes Obama listens to two groups of experts: liberal interventionists and "progressive realists." The latter group, rattled by the Iraq war, agrees with one of Obama's most traditional homilies from his memoir The Audacity of Hope: "There are few examples in history in which the freedom men and women crave is delivered through outside intervention."
But his position on this has always been arbitrary. Earlier, he seems, although it's never clear, to support intervention, but doesn't really clarify what kind. After his association with Power however, he was much more inclined to at least infer, that he would use military intervention. As I said, he changes, changed his mind several times on the issue.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
102 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Caught on video: Horrifying proof that Libya's freedom fighters have turned into brutal torturers [View all]
David__77
Feb 2012
OP
It fixed everything we wanted fixed, the existing tax structure for oil exlporation and production.
Arctic Dave
Feb 2012
#3
You mean the tax structure that robbed all oil revenue from the Libyan people?
TheWraith
Feb 2012
#4
Do we really have to go through this again? Did you not learn your lesson last time?
Arctic Dave
Feb 2012
#75
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson last time we went around on this.
Arctic Dave
Feb 2012
#77
Obama has always been pro-intervention, he was against unilaterally using power...
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#67
And yet, that position does not suggest that he "opposed it" as you falsely claimed.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#94
I'm going to end this conversation because it is the second time you have reverted to
sabrina 1
Feb 2012
#95
Her intentions are good? Don't kid yourself. Having observed pattern of her posting here -
Fool Count
Feb 2012
#102
So, actions of a few can be applied to a whole group if there's a mass insurgency or violent unrest.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#36
My chief criticism is against those who support US military intervention in other countries.
Bonobo
Feb 2012
#46
Did you know that there are some ex-freedom fighters who are protecting the Tawerga in Libya?
tabatha
Feb 2012
#2
You're still defending these people, not only after their abuses have become plain
EFerrari
Feb 2012
#39
Do you give South African whites the pass on apartheid as you did Germans vis a vis Nazism? nt
Bonobo
Feb 2012
#48
BTW, I was arrested demonstrating for divestment from the Apartheid govt. of S. Africa. nt
Bonobo
Feb 2012
#66
Yes, it is funny how some people here are unwittingly mimicking the pro-apartheid people.
tabatha
Feb 2012
#30
Militias from Benghazi and Zintan are trying to protect a refugee camp of 1,500 people
tabatha
Feb 2012
#6
Actually more judging of American people for the actions of their government would be a good thing.
Bonobo
Feb 2012
#10
The book in question, if I am not wrong, does not absolve the German people either.
sabrina 1
Feb 2012
#97
Yes, any pro-Gaddafi force that took part in atrocities of their own free will are guilty.
tabatha
Feb 2012
#24
Well, we did probably pay them to sit back and whack Ghadafi and his family. Not sure why. n/t
Leopolds Ghost
Feb 2012
#13
Systematic abuse of detainees has been reported at a number of facilities, unfortunately.
EFerrari
Feb 2012
#45
It is how I judge how prepared they are to set up a good, mature political system.
Bonobo
Feb 2012
#64
1) a peoples are not represented by their fighters 2) fighters do not represent the sole source...
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#79
You're not alone, fortunately. And now it seems the rest of the world is resisting it also.
sabrina 1
Feb 2012
#98