Very Foreign Policy...

Karl Hess - When I came to US, there were things that raised my eyebrows, but I thought that I might not understand the way it works, and the authorities should no better. But time after time the results were exactly the way I saw them coming.

Of course, not everything not everywhere, but in dealing with 3rd world, dealing with Russia, dealing with Iran, and dealing with Iraq, yes, I was surprised. I am in the country 24+ years, and I am no longer as naive, as I was then.

With Obama it is pretty simple. There are no leaps in our foreign policy. We did not make more friends, but made way more new enemies.

And I agree with "speak softly and carry a big stick," but show me the stick?

And it is not that Obama is the only one that makes me cringe. I keep saying that bringing democracy to the world is not our business and is fundamentally wrong. We should lead, and bring security, and not democracy. the fact that we love it does not mean that we need to choke other nations with it.

Marte Cliff - this truly is a million dollar question. Why is that we are so divided when we have everything or nearly everything? And we are so united when things are absolutely terrible? Do we need periodic September 11 to keep us a united country? Why are we so self destructive?

Gosh, if only I knew...

Karl Hess When at the first republican debate recently Bret asked candidates that question about their allegiance, pretty much, to the party, and Trump was the only one who didn't, I wanted to applaud him, but I thought he would explain it in a different way. I thought that the best answer would be that his allegiance is to the country and not to the Party, and if he feels like he can do something for the country, it was his duty, and if party lines were crossed, that was insignificant.

He did not say it this way, but I hope he simply was caught napping and was not ready to this question (which could have been a great question as the very last in the debate, but starting with it was a very bad decision by the hosts. Very poor judgement in my opinion.

Why I am saying it here? because you always put me in Republican shoes. I am not sure a really 100% fit, but, at the same token, hardly anyone is a 100% fit.

By the way, I knew Romney would lose because he was thinking (and expressing himself) not about the country, but someone cautioned him and he was only pleasing women and some other important groups.

I do not care about women, I do not care about LGBT, I do not care about whites and Blacks, I care about America, and everything else is in this context. Whoever is here to please some group will lose. Wasn't it how Reagan won? I was not here when it happened, so no knowledge about it, nothing.

Also, where you are right, is not that much my political view, which you thought are Russian, but rather the manner of expressing my views. This is sure Russian, and though I am trying to not to flare, this is what was so valuable in Russia, and this is what we were doing there, and it sits in me, and I can easily come off as rude... I know it, I try to deal with it, but this is here, like my accent, which I am not even trying to fight anymore...

So, what I wanted to say, is that I appreciate your comments, even when I am in absolute disagreement :) And even when I might sound brush, I am a friendly guy, it is simply the tradition, which is deep

Marte Cliff - like so many other things in life, it really doesn't :)

Karl Hess - just heard that Iran will be the one, that checks the military installation and compliance with the agreement.

Let the goat guard the garden. Tell me about the big and, of course, very clever reason to allow this? Can anyone think of a worse deal? Even imaginable? You, as a realtor, would you agree to a deal where you client has no assurance of anything except for "do not worry, everything will be simply wonderful". Of course, there will be plenty pof those who would explain that it is not only fine, but it is a genius decision, and you willbe sending me these quotes to show that smart people think like Obama. They are smart, so what is their reason to sell off the security of this country and, quite probably, the world?

Karl Hess - 89% of Russians are choking from love to Putin. 89% of the very same Russians are pissed off with the government decision to destroy sanctioned food. Now, what is notrmal for Russia and what has been normal for Russia, is a deep belief that a good god, tsar or ruler does not know that his men are doing. Hence, letters to Putin.

If something happens to Putin, he is dethroned or dies, or the power is taken, you would need 3 days to have his approval rating at single digits.

Yes, I do not understand how anyone in their sound mind can't see who he is. However, I know that pwople in the world in any country never ask themselves the question about the void in world leadership, which the governemtn of even Saudi Arabia voiced in private conversations.

Yes, his rating would go through the roof in Kenya, but does it really impress you?

It does not impress me. I have my eyes, and what I see is shameful. And while Russians do not like him, Putin and Medvedev do like him a lot. Who else would have alloed Russia to do what they have done.

Karl Hess give them $150 Billion, lift the sanctions, have them get the bomb, and then you are serious that we we use force?

Then why didn't we use even discretion, and not force with Russia?

And I love it about the Atomic agency. They tried it before, and it did not work. It is not going to work, and the only change (Obama loves change) would be change of rhetoric, and now we would not interfere, no matter what.

Remember Syria? If they only use chemical, then we wil strike.

Maybe I missed when we did strike?

Similar this with ISIS. And then we do not do anything with ISIS.

Our only enemy are the soldiers of Mother Nature in the fight against global warming. And if needed, we would send the army to the sun to fight it. This ios so far fewtched, but I might believe rather than believing that Obama would fight for America and not against it. let's say one is still technically impossible, but if not for that, that would be up his alley. but fighting enemies, protecting the nation and the world, nah, this is not for him.

Karl Hess - not sure there was an objective need to rush that much with unfreezing the funds.

There are 4 americans "frozen" in Iran, could we make their release a condition? Can we honestly say that we are doing everything to free the innocent?

Karl Hess - But who said that it is a good deal (with Iran)? I hear a lot that it is a terrible deal, and all I hear in response, is that it is the best they could do.

But "the best they could do" does not mean that it is a good deal. It usually means that they could not do better.

So, the powerful nation could not do better with the nation under sanctions, and gave up a lot (original parameters, what survived?) and got a delay in develpment of a nuke?

And all because we are afraid of a military conflict? When they do not really have means of defending the installations?

Now, they will have one of the most powerful military in the world ( they declared it before the ink dried), and we have no problem with it. We believe that we can always go back to this point and even strike if needed.

How long are we going to lie to ourselves and to the world?

We would face a country with a bomb, strong conventional weapon and excellent anti air defense.

So, what we are saying is that in 5 years we are probably will stillbe fighting, but it would cost us so much more lives.

What a deal!