Comments on: Ambassador Kenney: We did not meddle in MoA-AD

By: Ding G. Gagelonia

Ding G. Gagelonia — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:12:13 +0000

Atty. Ben,
Read my post again. I am not a pro-Obama dreamer. I dream only of Filipinos controlling theeir destiny.

I’d rather not tangle, but it is intresting how you use the term condescending. While I certainly agree with you that Amb. Kenney is no simpleton, condescending is how you often sound. One request, get off from your high horse, sir.

But be assured, Atty. Benjamin Cardinez, | have only admiration for your erudite missives here at FV. THEY REALLY ADD DEEPER PERSPECTIVE EVEN AS WE DON’T ALWAYS AGREE.WE DON’T HAVE TO, RIGHT?

By: AdB

AdB — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:41:25 +0000

Agree with DJB’s take:

“People would be wrong to think Obama is some kind of peace freak. I’ve read all his speeches and listened to his reading of The Audacity of Hope. He is a JFK type hawk, i.e. a mailed fist in a velvet glove.

By: Bencard

Bencard — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:18:25 +0000

if there’s anything i hate the most is some ordinary joe blow passing judgment, rather gratuitously and condescendingly, on another far superior than him/her in every way, shape or form. ambassador kenney would not be representing u.s.a., even in a third world country, if she was a “simpleton”. u.s.a. is not like the philippines where certified nincompoops can be appointed if the political connection is “right”.

dream on, ding gagelonia. the same coalition that put reagan in the white house is now solidly behind mccain/palin. obama will go the way of flash-in-the-pan, one-hit, rocker.

btw, remember what i said, america will do whatever is good for america.

By: Ding G. Gagelonia

Ding G. Gagelonia — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:59:18 +0000

Yup, America for America.

By: Dean Jorge Bocobo

Dean Jorge Bocobo — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:43:23 +0000

People would be wrong to think Obama is some kind of peace freak. I’ve read all his speeches and listened to his reading of The Audacity of Hope. He is a JFK type hawk, i.e. a mailed fist in a velvet glove. American Foreign Policy is always inherited from administration to adminstration. Most people are not aware for example that it was the Clinton-era Iraq Liberation Act which made Iraq such a natural target (and legitimate worry) as it called for regime change there as part of US foreign policy. Clinton bombed Baghdad with 300 cruise missiles in December 1998 after signing the law. One sobering thought is that every major war in the 20th century was fought and/or became their bloodiest under a Democrat President. Under Obama, Afghanistan and Southeast Asia will become a major theatre of operations for US counter terrorism efforts. But even that is consequence of victory in Iraq (recently defined by Gen. Petraeus as a local government able to carry the fight on its own–which Iraq seems ready to take the responsibility for).

By: Ding G. Gagelonia

Ding G. Gagelonia — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:21:46 +0000

Dean,
Literally, indeed, Kenney’s time is up. A you correctly put it we “are off the American radar with the US elections on deck. We wait till Obama is elected, unless McCain pulls an upset, right?
But am worried if the Republicans stay in the White House. I remember too well how Reagan cuddled the dictator.

Obama and his views on the Philippines are still largely unknown apart from how he wisely avoided GMA. I know though that Barack has a Filipina on his senior advisory team.

By: Dean Jorge Bocobo

Dean Jorge Bocobo — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:48:33 +0000

No need to get metaphysical here. Kristie Kenney was duped by Malacanang, played like a fiddle by Gloria. She’s a simpleton and an embarrassment to the United States. But it is a sign that the Philippines is once more “off the radar” even at the State Dept since her statement sounds like they never really “engaged” in the issues of MOA-AD, allowing USIP to dictate the “peace technology.” Her time is up!

By: Bencard

Bencard — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:49:10 +0000

j, try to focus on the qualifier “almost always” in my comment you quoted. at any rate, america makes mistake too from time to time – they are not perfect, you see. sometimes they would support regimes in the hope the latter would choose the path of democracy and freedom, only to be disappointed and betrayed in the end.

in the case of “allies”, e.g., the philippines, i think the problem lies in the mindset, or mental habit, if you will, that as “allies” we have to be constantly favored and catered to over others – fostering a dependent and mendicant expectations.
why can’t we learn to think and act according to our best national interest too like the u.s.? if we have to part ways with them from time to time, damn it, let’s do it – instead of whining and bellyaching that we are not getting the favors and attention we are entitled to as “allies”.

By: J

Sat, 30 Aug 2008 06:17:21 +0000

bencard, you said: “the triumph of democracy over any form of totalitarianism is almost always at the forefront of americans’ aspirations because they believe that only that kind of government system would ensure their national interests and safety.”

Musharraf and the Taliban were supported by the States early on.

And your right, the US solely acts according to its interests. Sometimes at the expense of its allies.

By: Bencard

Bencard — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 02:54:44 +0000

j, there you go again reading something in my comments that isn’t there. where did i say taliban and musharaff are “advocates of freedom and democracy”? please don’t attribute to me your own kakamamie ideas.

keep wondering till you are blue on the face. but remember what i said. the u.s. acts according to its best interest of which it is the sole judge. so, if u.s. wants to witness the signing of some documents, or change its mind about a proposed hand-out, i believe it has all the right to do so.