The dichotomy between Obama in 2008 and Obama today is perhaps one of the most striking examples of PR brand reversals in history.
Obama recently announced that in addition to moving troops in to the Gulf region, he will also be sending troops to Australia. The move in Australia accompanies his statements that the US is a "Pacific nation" which intends to play "a larger and long-term role in shaping this region and its future."
For a president who received the Nobel Peace Prize and campaigned based on hope and change, it's ironic that his strengths now are seen primarily as being a military president who will not shy away from any confrontation.
Yes, China is a bad country, but putting troops on their doorstep is not the answer. How would the US react if China put 2,500 troops along the Mexican border? Or how would Canada act if the US put 2,500 troops up in Alaska (for easy access to Russia) - I'm pretty sure Canadians would be enraged.
Not to mention, after 10 years of war, is the world not sick and tired of all this fighting yet? Should resources not be spent fixing the US economy instead of military posturing? And make no mistake, putting troops in to Australia is military posturing against China.
But perhaps the answer lies in the question. Perhaps the US economy can't be fixed. Perhaps Europe is in the tank as well. Perhaps all that's left now is for the world to fight over natural resources and political ideologies and to bully each other around in hopes of one day attaining dominance over each other.
This type of craziness is what, in part, lead to me exit the markets months ago. What we are witnessing in the world - whether it be with the banks, politicians, the military - is not reflective of a sound rational perspective focused on sustainability and growth. Rather, it's the old 'I've got bigger balls than you' mentality that caused much of the issues we face today. Essentially an ideology that outright rejects the notion that peaceful co-existence is possible in this world.
From a PR perspective, I don't think turning China into an 'existential' threat, the way they did with Al Qaeda (who was a threat, although existential is a bit over the top), is going to give Obama much of a boost in the polls. The economy remains the number one issue for most 'voters', whether in the US or Canada, and all this military focus will not go over well with the voters.
Let's hope the world can hold on another year and the US elects someone that cleans up the mess in Washington, fixes the corrupt regulators so businesses return to a fair playing field, and for the love of God turns their back on all this warmongering in the name of peace.
On a side note, I stumbled on this video the republicans are running regarding Obama. It's a taste of what he'll be facing come the general election. He will have to pull off the PR performance of a lifetime to offset this kind of 'hold your feet to the fire' messaging from the right.
Obama recently announced that in addition to moving troops in to the Gulf region, he will also be sending troops to Australia. The move in Australia accompanies his statements that the US is a "Pacific nation" which intends to play "a larger and long-term role in shaping this region and its future."
For a president who received the Nobel Peace Prize and campaigned based on hope and change, it's ironic that his strengths now are seen primarily as being a military president who will not shy away from any confrontation.
Yes, China is a bad country, but putting troops on their doorstep is not the answer. How would the US react if China put 2,500 troops along the Mexican border? Or how would Canada act if the US put 2,500 troops up in Alaska (for easy access to Russia) - I'm pretty sure Canadians would be enraged.
Not to mention, after 10 years of war, is the world not sick and tired of all this fighting yet? Should resources not be spent fixing the US economy instead of military posturing? And make no mistake, putting troops in to Australia is military posturing against China.
But perhaps the answer lies in the question. Perhaps the US economy can't be fixed. Perhaps Europe is in the tank as well. Perhaps all that's left now is for the world to fight over natural resources and political ideologies and to bully each other around in hopes of one day attaining dominance over each other.
This type of craziness is what, in part, lead to me exit the markets months ago. What we are witnessing in the world - whether it be with the banks, politicians, the military - is not reflective of a sound rational perspective focused on sustainability and growth. Rather, it's the old 'I've got bigger balls than you' mentality that caused much of the issues we face today. Essentially an ideology that outright rejects the notion that peaceful co-existence is possible in this world.
From a PR perspective, I don't think turning China into an 'existential' threat, the way they did with Al Qaeda (who was a threat, although existential is a bit over the top), is going to give Obama much of a boost in the polls. The economy remains the number one issue for most 'voters', whether in the US or Canada, and all this military focus will not go over well with the voters.
Let's hope the world can hold on another year and the US elects someone that cleans up the mess in Washington, fixes the corrupt regulators so businesses return to a fair playing field, and for the love of God turns their back on all this warmongering in the name of peace.
On a side note, I stumbled on this video the republicans are running regarding Obama. It's a taste of what he'll be facing come the general election. He will have to pull off the PR performance of a lifetime to offset this kind of 'hold your feet to the fire' messaging from the right.
Comments
Post a Comment