@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
the Palestinian Israel conflict
How is this Obama's problem?
What should Obama be doing differently?
hawkeye10 wrote:spreading democracy in Libya...the failure of which has further destabilized africa and now syria with weapons
Gaddafi's regime fell because Libyans toppled it. The US and NATO helped to nudge it, but that's about all. Otherwise, the situation would have simply devolved into another long-term, Syria-style civil war. Considering that you also blame Obama for what's going on in Syria, it's strange that you blame Obama for
not allowing a similar crisis to develop in Libya.
hawkeye10 wrote:influencing China
influencing Russia
influencing Europe
These don't mean anything.
hawkeye10 wrote:stabilizing Iraq
How? By sending in more troops?
hawkeye10 wrote:doing anything positive with Afghanistan
That's a situation that was handed to him. And considering that he's doing the most positive thing possible by drawing down troops in anticipation of leaving the country entirely next year, I'm not sure what you would have him do differently.
hawkeye10 wrote:drawing North Korea toward civility
How?
hawkeye10 wrote:salvaging the wrecked global economic system
Obama can only save the global economy by saving the American economy, and, despite Republican intransigence and some misguided policies of his own, he has managed to do a decent job of that.
hawkeye10 wrote:dealing with ocean pirates
Piracy is down. What's the problem?
hawkeye10 wrote:drawing India towards being a modern state
How is that the US's concern?
hawkeye10 wrote:stopping the slide of Pakinstan towards the Taliban
Pakistan is close to being a failed state. But it's a near-failed state with nukes, so there's not much room for the US to maneuver, and I'm not sure what Obama should be doing differently in that regard. Any suggestions?
hawkeye10 wrote:making Somalia into a functioning state
What would you have him do? Send in troops? Clinton tried that, and you claim that he was almost as bad as Obama.
hawkeye10 wrote:stopping Mali from becoming a failed state
You seem to think that Obama was elected emperor of the world instead of president of the United States. Obama stepped aside and let the French do most of the heavy lifting in Mali. That was the right call.
hawkeye10 wrote:stopping Iran from any of their goals
Actually, Obama has done a fairly good job of containing Iran, as far as it has been possible to do. The only areas where Iran has made significant inroads - Iraq and Syria - are the legacies of the disastrous Bush foreign policy in the region. Obama was left to pick up the pieces.
hawkeye10 wrote:stopping Lebanon from once again being a failed state
Again, how is that the US's job?
hawkeye10 wrote:improving the lives of the palistinians
The Palestinian problem could be solved overnight if the two main parties - Palestine and Israel - would negotiate in good faith. Neither side has shown much willingness to do that, especially Israel, which can always depend on the US to tolerate its bad behavior while suffering few if any negative consequences. That, to be sure, is chargeable to Obama, but he's no worse than all of his predecessors who followed the exact same policy. Obama, in other words, isn't historically inept with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just typically inept.