[quote]pushharder wrote:
You are wrong. Al Qaeda WAS allowed in country.
[/quote]
Evidence this. Actually evidence it with a reputable source that refutes the declassified documents and commission reports I cited. I’ll wait.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
…Note that you have now explained that the latter point does not include A] Scholar/expert opinion in the U.S. or B] World opinion as measured country-by-county by one of the most respected polling firms. So, I don’t know what data you’ve got, but it sure as hell needs to be pretty specific in order to both justify the claim and skirt the criteria by which Bismark/smh’s evidence were disqualified.[/quote]
I already responded to this. Your beauty pageant poll is not a mirror of what constitutes effective foreign policy by the United States of America. It’s downright laughable that you went with this. If anything, it smacks of desperation on your part to “refute” my claim.
Go country by country around the world today and tell me which ones think Obama’s foreign policy is effective from their standpoint (do this, smh, do it).
Is it Canada?
…
Fiji?
Who, smh? Who thinks our foreign policy is saweeeeeeeeeeet?
[/quote]
I provided the only evidential measure of foreign opinion of Obama of which I’m aware.
YOU made the claim. A question is not evidence. What is your evidence? As in, link me to data that supports your claim, as I did in refutation of it.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
…Note that you have now explained that the latter point does not include A] Scholar/expert opinion in the U.S. or B] World opinion as measured country-by-county by one of the most respected polling firms. So, I don’t know what data you’ve got, but it sure as hell needs to be pretty specific in order to both justify the claim and skirt the criteria by which Bismark/smh’s evidence were disqualified.[/quote]
I already responded to this. Your beauty pageant poll is not a mirror of what constitutes effective foreign policy by the United States of America. It’s downright laughable that you went with this. If anything, it smacks of desperation on your part to “refute” my claim.
[/quote]
That is ridiculous.
I provided hard data on international opinion.
You don’t like it?
Refute it with hard data. Support your position with hard data.
Evidence the claim that the internaitonal community “almost universally” considers Obama’s FP worse than Bush’s.
Again, I’ll wait.
You made the claim. Surely you can back it up.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
I provided the only evidential measure of foreign opinion of Obama of which I’m aware.
[/quote]
Ummm…I think we’ve found the problem.
[/quote]
A] What other hard, data-centric, eviedntial measure is there of foreign opinion of an American president
B] Provide it
C] Prove that it shows Obama’s FP to be “almost universally considered” worse than just about everybody else’s, including Bush’s
Stop stalling. Are you going to evidence your claim or not? I do expect an answer to this question.
^ Just saw the end of your last post. Missed it because of the broken quote. You have all the time necessary, of course.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
No, you didn’t provide any hard data about foreign policy. It doesn’t matter how incessantly you beat the popularity drum we’re talking apples and oranges.
[/quote]
Let’s get something straight though.
I did not beat any drums.
YOU made a claim about international opinion of Obama leadership.
I posted data on…INTERNATIONAL OPINION OF OBAMA’S LEADERSHIP.
If you meant something different, you are sure as hell having a hard time coming up with what exactly it was.
I have proved, beyond doubt, that you are incorrect with regard to international opinion. This, by the way, already destroys your claim of “almost universal.”
But, let’s say you actually meant something else. I will eagerly wait to learn what it is.
This argument–about what amounts to the Pew results–has more heat than light.
Perhaps I dismissed it too quickly; let’s look a the methods sections.
From 2009:
Please notice that the surveys were conducted in late May and early June, just 4 months after Obama took office.
The opinions elicited in that year’s survey could not have possibly reflected any real changes in American foreign policy as perceived by the participants. I interpret these results as a measure of Obamamania, the hope that he was different and would change matters quickly, a hope and not a reality. (See again my skepticism on his Nobel Peace Prize Award.)
The 2012 Survey was conducted in March and April.
So the Pew folks, with 95 % confidence limits and 3.7% margin of error can declare their findings statistically significant; but who was the study population? (Urban dwellers, cell-phone users, etc., all with the assurances that these were representative samples.)
The question I ask is: does this matter?
Do these surveys reflect the democratic will of the people, and that is in turn translated to each nation’s support of American policy under Obama?
I have my answer. Probably not.
Are relations with Pakistan better? (Think Drones.)
Does France lend support tot he U.S., or follow its own narrow interests? They will sell 2 aircraft carriers to Russia, unless Obama’s mighty persuasive abilities come forth.
Germany? Is it willing to forgo a few degrees of comfort for the forced annexation within Europe of territory of an independent country, a country whose territorial integrity was “guaranteed” in 1994? It does not look that way so far.
Were the Czech Republic and Poland pleased or embarrassed when Obama unilaterally pulled plans for missile defense–with no concessions in return from Moscow? (And how poorly prepared does that leave us for subsequent events in Abkhazia, Ossetia, Crimea, Ukraine, and possible NATO members in the Baltic.)
Has the U.S. squandered diplomatic suasion more since Obama and Hillary assumed office? (Think Libya–led from behind; Syria–red lines drawn by a paper tiger, leading to incalculable misery, Ukraine & Crimea). Even the “simple” task of arranging a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq–a war whose ending was planned by Bush & company–squandered, irretrievably…and now chaotically.
The Pew “beauty contest” assuages some people’s Bush-guilt, but I would not lean on it as evidence of the practical support of the “world community.” And in any case, it looks like the bloom is off that rose, too.
Obama’s very first act upon election was to travel to Saudi Arabia then give the Cairo speech. The Cairo speech was the most blatant form of appeasement since Neville Chamberlain. That act alone did more harm than anything any other statesman on earth has done in modern times. His administration has subsequently engaged in appeasing and courting CARE - a known Muslim Brotherhood front. He then sat by and cheered as Hosni Mubarak was overthrown by the Muslim Brotherhood. His foreign policy has been an utter disaster.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
No, you didn’t provide any hard data about foreign policy. It doesn’t matter how incessantly you beat the popularity drum we’re talking apples and oranges.
[/quote]
Let’s get something straight though.
I did not beat any drums.
YOU made a claim about international opinion of Obama leadership.
I posted data on…INTERNATIONAL OPINION OF OBAMA’S LEADERSHIP.
If you meant something different, you are sure as hell having a hard time coming up with what exactly it was.
I have proved, beyond doubt, that you are incorrect with regard to international opinion. This, by the way, already destroys your claim of “almost universal.”
But, let’s say you actually meant something else. I will eagerly wait to learn what it is.[/quote]
Moving the goal posts again, I see.
I made a claim about the foreign policy of the WhamBamThankYouMaam administration not the “INTERNATIONAL OPINION OF OBAMA’S LEADERSHIP.”[/quote]
[quote]pushharder wrote:
So you tell me which countries around the world, and especially our allies, who have stated that Barack’s foreign policy is just plumb swell.[/quote]
Am I going to keep having to prove your own words to you?
If that isn’t a comment on international opinion of this administration, then I’m a bowl of pea soup.
Now, I’m not moving the goalposts. I don’t even know what the damn goalposts are. What exactly are you trying to argue here, if it has nothing to do with international opinion of Obama’s foreign policy?
And how do you measure it?
And what are the measurements?
Edit: This is directed at Doc too. I don’t pretend that opinion polling is fantastic. I don’t hang my opinions on it. But if you’re disputing the notion that Obama is in better standing with the international community–or, in push’s case, whatever it is that you’re disputing, because I am not being sarcastic when I say that I can’t figure it out (and I’m purdy good at figuring things out)–then what data do you use to support this claim?
It seems pretty damn fatuous to make claims about “almost universal opinion” and then discount elitist scholars/FP experts and international opinion polls. What good measure is there, and what are the measurements? Or are these gut checks?
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
…
Edit: This is directed at Doc too. I don’t pretend that opinion polling is fantastic. I don’t hang my opinions on it. But if you’re disputing the notion that Obama is in better standing with the international community–or, in push’s case, whatever it is that you’re disputing, because I am not being sarcastic when I say that I can’t figure it out (and I’m purdy good at figuring things out)–then what data do you use to support this claim?
It seems pretty damn fatuous to make claims about “almost universal opinion” and then discount elitist scholars/FP experts and international opinion polls. What good measure is there, and what are the measurements? Or are these gut checks?[/quote]
My response and yours cross in the ether-space.
See above.
We all know that polls are manipulated by the sample populaton and the nature and tone of the questions asked.
Simple question: what matters more in peoples’ lives–opinion or effects?
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
The question I ask is: does this matter?
Do these surveys reflect the democratic will of the people, and that is in turn translated to each nation’s support of American policy under Obama?
I have my answer. Probably not.[/quote]
That is fine. What objective measurement do you propose we use? If there is none, do you qualify your opinions accordingly?
Do you think that a list like this could be made for other presidents? Bush II, for example. Do you think that it will be longer or shorter? Do you think that there are more anecdotal instances of foreign displeasure with Bush, or with Obama?
I ask again: If anybody is making factual claims here–and I’m not; I’m refuting a factual claim–then what, exactly, are they using for evidence? Is it objective? Does it involve data, or “feelings”?
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
Simple question: what matters more in peoples’ lives–opinion or effects?
[/quote]
I think what matters most in people’s lives is whether or not the most powerful man in the world is prudent with his power.
And there isn’t a doubt in my mind that the world judges Obama more favorably than Bush in this respect.
If I am wrong, I am waiting for someone to show me this.
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
…
It seems pretty damn fatuous to make claims about “almost universal opinion” and then discount elitist scholars/FP experts and international opinion polls. What good measure is there, and what are the measurements? Or are these gut checks?[/quote]
the definition of “consensus?”
An opinion embraced by all that is endorsed by no one.
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
…
It seems pretty damn fatuous to make claims about “almost universal opinion” and then discount elitist scholars/FP experts and international opinion polls. What good measure is there, and what are the measurements? Or are these gut checks?[/quote]
the definition of “consensus?”
An opinion embraced by all that is endorsed by no one.[/quote]
I have to say, you have a certain way of injecting a dose of conviviality into argument.
We are all “friends” here–Push and I very much included–after all.
Anyway, I am curious to hear how we could possibly determine the victor (Obama or Bush) vis-a-vis international opinion without international opinion polls.
Someone could conduct an academic study, and poll foreign officials/editorial boards, etc. But I am not sure that we have the resources here at PWI.