Difference in attitudes? President of France and POTUS?

2015-11-16T21:56:51-05:00

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2015 10:01 PM

2015-11-16T22:01:11-05:00

Instant observation: France Pres. unites his country, takes immediate action; POTUS hems and haws around, dislocates the country.

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Nov 16 at 2015 10:02 PM

2015-11-16T22:02:53-05:00

CSM Charles Hayden there is a difference, I feel France is going after ISIS and POTHUS is not taking a stronger enough stand against ISIS. This is not good for America, he must do more and take the fight to ISIS.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Nov 16 at 2015 10:13 PM

2015-11-16T22:13:09-05:00

The President of France is reacting. In anger or posturing, I can't yet tell. President Obama is still acting with great restraint. Out of confusion or to provide ISIL an advantage, I can't yet tell. Only time will answer both questions. Sadly, I don't think either matters. In both cases, only ISIL wins, at least for now. Hopefully, our strategists are taking the initiative to plan for an effective response when someone occupies the White House who is capable of making a decision. Good, bad, or indifferent, I no longer care. I simply pray for a leader who can decide.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2015 10:14 PM

2015-11-16T22:14:04-05:00

I would retain any comments regarding POTUS, but I would share some points about François Hollande regarding defense and security issues.
While everybody seems to like his fast reactive response to the terror attacks, it is important to keep in mind that his administration has significantly cut France's defense budget over his presidency.
Moreover, France's intelligence community had failed, twice, to evaluate risks and apply proactive measures to prevent terrorists from entering the country.

I think he didn't have a choice, it was either an immediate response, or a civil war.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Nov 16 at 2015 10:19 PM

2015-11-16T22:19:15-05:00

The same as the difference between Bush and Obama.

Response by PVT Robert Gresham made Nov 16 at 2015 10:29 PM

2015-11-16T22:29:04-05:00

CSM Charles Hayden After watching the evening news, I would say that the POTUS still does not understand what the problem is. Whether he is ignorant, or simply misguided, I have no idea.

The President of France, on the other hand, seems to have had a wake-up call and is hell bent to show radical Islam (Yes, I said it.) that there are consequences to their actions. I believe that our President should be very careful that US allies do not decide to join Russia, and leave the US where it has been on this subject for most of the last seven years......standing still.

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Nov 17 at 2015 1:24 AM

2015-11-17T01:24:00-05:00

President of France can use the word "RADICAL" President of US cannot. President of FRANCE knows ISIS is a real threat and went out to do something about it. President of US is still in denial and even stated this morning that ISIS is under control....there is nothing to worry about for us here in the US and he went as far as to bring up the SYRIAN refugee's and said we should let them in with open arms...that we shouldn't be making a big thing out of not being able to VET them properly and that we don't or should not have to worry about ISIS getting onto and or bombing or killing on US soil.....oh and he also said this morning...or rather yesterday morning that he feels that ISIS can be dealt with over peace talks and emails. HEEELLLLLOOOOO!?!?! Can anyone say LOST HIS MARBLES?

Yeah....differences ??? France is living in the here and now and knows what's what....and US is living in DENIAL and seeing through ROSE COLORED Glasses.

Response by SPC David S. made Nov 17 at 2015 2:27 AM

2015-11-17T02:27:47-05:00

1) Iraq collapsing
2) Failing to aid Iran’s Green Revolution
3) Triggering a nuclear arms race in the Middle East (2 may have prevented 3)
4) The rise of ISIS
5) Libya collapses
6) Erasing the “Red Line” in Syria - triggering a host of other geopolitical problems
7) Russian and Chinese - yes while things are a mess in the Middle East on the back burner is the partnership between Moscow and Beijing - This is America’s No. 1 long range foreign-policy challenge.

While there are limits in America’s capacity to shape the entire geopolitical landscape there are still choices to be made. These choices are typically derived from a foreign policy that supports American interest. From what has been demonstrated the only common core objective that can been deciphered is to destabilize nations in the Middle East. The effects of his Presidency will be felt for a very, very long time.

Response by LTC Eric Coger made Nov 17 at 2015 4:44 AM

2015-11-17T04:44:22-05:00

We can discuss the issues, but we need to be careful (for those of us on Active Duty or some retirees) about directly criticizing the President. It's not black and white, perception matters. Hollande is reacting well, but what choice did he have? All of the Chamberlains need to go so we can get the Churchills in. We need to unite and fight to win. With a clear endstate and a strategy that supports all of the tactics.

Response by SGT William Howell made Nov 17 at 2015 6:54 AM

2015-11-17T06:54:32-05:00

Obama is not going to send troops on the ground anywhere. Period. It will ruin his legacy. He is running the country for the history books, not the country. Not being disrespectful to the POTUS, he sure is not the first one to do this and will not be the last one. Those that do seem to be forgotten the quickest. Anybody ever study Ford in history class?

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 17 at 2015 7:29 AM

2015-11-17T07:29:21-05:00

What? what are you talking about? there is no different! (sac off) lol

One do something, one "words" come out of his mouth that don't help at all.