Well to clarify : That is my interpretation of what you are doing to those who found the US absence troubling.
marie: you have made your point. Many times, in fact. The absence of President Obama at the photo op troubles you (and, yes, other people too–but not, apparently, the French themselves, who were the victims of this horrible terrorist attack).
Meanwhile you might want to accept the fact that ad hominem attacks don’t make help you make your case.
Since my name has been invoked . . . no national leaders were killed so no head of state necessary. Angela Merkel, bless her heart, is not a international symbol the way that ANY sitting President of the United States is. The presence of Obama would be a logistical nightmare but also a security risk for the public and a major distraction. Europeans don’t necessarily want America swooping in and tainting their issue. I have not followed as closely as maybe I should have, but if they didn’t want Bibi there I can’t imagine them wanting Obama.
I could see Kerry going unless he was asked not to or it presented specific logistical security challenges. It does seem odd that people would be clamoring for Kerry to go to France when his being a perceived Francophile was ammunition against him in his presidential run not that long ago. This seems and odd turn around in support of biting religious satire from the War on Christmas people.
On the whole, I don’t see where this is something that has to break down into sides. What is there to take sides about? Is there a pro-terrorist party?
Now . . . back to football . . . my ducks nee all the help they can get.
Some people on this thread felt Obama should have attended. Others did not think it was necessary. And still others got upset that anyone questioned the Administration’s decision not to go.
Right, and then a bunch of unrelated stuff that was worse got thrown in to make everyone be quiet, I guess.
No one is trying to “make everyone be quiet,” marie. Wouldn’t that go against the underlying issue of this thread, and the attacks–that we need to support free speech? This is where the critical thinking taught in college can come in really handy. 
Yes, but it only works when you have a handle on all of the facts otherwise the discussion gets very convoluted.
If Obama attends that symbolically makes this our issue. That means that an attack on France is an attack on us and when lots of people would love to make an attack on us that doesn’t require a transatlantic trip, France becomes more vulnerable not less.
At any rate, if those who might have felt snubbed have said that they weren’t snubbed then it seems like case closed and move on to what can actually be done aside from symbolic gestures.
What the French think is not relevant as Obama represents us not them. Some Americans felt they/we should be represented and I don’t see how that opinion is a problem for anyone but apparently it is.
too late to edit post #122 (dang multi-tasking) so please forgive the typing errors and incorrect grammar like “an international” - You can never tell when the message board grammarians will strike. I will blame it on the Ohio State offensive line . . . they are giving me fits!
Ok I see you deleted your reference to the French.
I made no reference to “The French” and did no editing as you can see by the lack of edits. If the leaders of France asked him not to go then he shouldn’t have gone (no idea if that happened). I don’t care about the opinion of the French citizens only their safety as it relates to dropping a major target in their midst on short notice.
Ok sorry I misread, but it doesn’t change anything I wrote. To my knowledge the French did not tell Obama not to come. That was his decision and one the White House now regrets.
" I will blame it on the Ohio State offensive line . . . they are giving me fits!’
Ha, ha, good one! I will just blame everything on the Seahawks if they start losing!
However, I don’t understand why people are arguing here. The administration fully admits they screwed up by not sending someone higher up to march with the 40 other world leaders. They regret it, it was a mistake. Terrorism IS our problem, too, we should be standing up with them. The French press IS criticizing us.
But they acknowledged their mistake, so good on them. I hope they learn from it, this looks bad on the US, as if we don’t stand with the French and that we don’t care. But we do, and the administration admitted their error. Therefore, I don’t know why anyone would still defend the administration for not sending someone more important to the administration, and I don’t see any point in continuing to bash them when they’ve already admitted the mistake. So???
Go Ducks!
I can’t imagine people jumping up and down about Obama not supporting offensive journalists who lampoon religion or Obama not loving France enough, so I have to believe that this is part of the larger “Obama is not a friend to Israel” meme.
And just in time, the second half . . . signing off :)>-
Okay, good luck Ducks. But if you believe our president is “a friend to Israel,” I have some swamp land for sale…or maybe classified “wetlands”, just as bad, you can’t do anything with it. In his own speech to the UN, the president said, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam”. And there is no context to which that doesn’t sound like sucking up to Islamists.
Supporting offensive journalists is one thing we could never expect. However, being blasé about their slaughter is another thing entirely. Then again, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” so what more could we expect?
busdriver, how does one conflate calling the French president/offering intelligence support/making public statements condemning the attacks with “being blasé about the slaughter”? If that’s not hyperbole I don’t know what is. And the insinuation that the president sympathizes with the Islamic terrorists is completely ridiculous.
Now read the whole speech word for word like I just did. When you get there pay special attention the entire list that you reference. If you have read the entire thing in order in context already, then I have no words of response and it wouldn’t be worth wasting them if I did.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/25/remarks-president-un-general-assembly
From the full speech:
Exactly.