Political Posts

[changegonnacome]

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

No doubt President Biden has severely weakened the US military

 

You don't weaken a military in the just two years.....you help weaken a military in that time.....weakening was occurring under Obama and most recently Trump (for all his rhetoric about doing the opposite)

[John Hjorth]

9 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

But its fair to say that Ukraine is severely constrained for artillery and Russia not so much? Which given the nature of the current battlefield is a big advantage.

 

The way I personally perceive the total situation as of now from all my steady ongoing reading here, there and everywhere, is that the above is about right.

 

And from a Western politics point of view, it's a disgrace, a scandal and just so embarrassing. The perils of democracy [yes, democracy also has a back of the coin, perhaps several more, - one of them being it's inefficient, slow, and cumbersome!], perhaps combined with bureaucracy, again combined with NATO organizational bloat makes efficicient execution almost impossible.

 

It's so frustrating to be an observer to this. *shaking head*

 

The long range Cruise missiles made available to Ukraine will be a game changer going forward, if used intelligently.

 

The next step to up the ante I speculate will be to include donated F16 fighters from the West to Ukraine in the the combat actions - oh wait ! : Training of Ukrainian pilots in flying this has not started yet! 

 

 

[Spekulatius]

1 minute ago, changegonnacome said:

 

You don't weaken a military in the just two years.....you help weaken a military in that time.....weakening was occurring under Obama and most recently Trump (for all his rhetoric about doing the opposite)

Biden was the first US president who stood up to Putin. None before did anything and the list is long - Bush, Obama, Trump all were in the appeasement camp. Putin's miscalculation was that Biden would just be another on in the appeasement list and that clearly isn't the case.

 

The blunders in Afghanistan and how to get out of there are a different matter. The bigger mistake was probably to get in in the first place.

 

The discussion here reveals much more about personal biases than the topic at hand. I am including myself here to blame as well.

[cubsfan]

Your strong or weakened military is useless if it’s backed up by cowards running your foreign policy. Biden’s cut and run in Afghanistan was an idiotic move that worries your allies sick - and got a lot of innocent people killed in the process. That move had NOTHING to do with military strength- only the courage to use it.

 

Likewise, Obama’s supposed “red line” for Russia invading Crimea. Same thing - empty talk and no action.

 

Empty leaders that back a strong military are the biggest fear for our allies.

[cubsfan]

Say what you like , but Trump knew how to project strength and show his adversaries he was NOT afraid to use US strength.

 

He dropped the MOAB on an Taliban terrorist encampment- and the result was NO more US deaths for 18 months.

 

When Putin screwed around in Syria , he killed 200 Russian mercenaries with not a single US casualty.

 

Not need to avoid the true facts in making your arguments boys.

 

And don’t forget the fat little terrorist in N. Korea - against all criticism, Trump charmed him at the same time as threatening him. After he saw the above - no trouble from him.

[Xerxes]

I do agree with @cubsfan and his comment about Trump. Like it or not, hate him or not, Trump was a game changer. For better or worse.

 

 

That said, I also agree that Biden did stood up to Putin. Eventhough in hindsight he should not have said some of the thing he said on the eve of the invasion. Biden (much like McCain, or Bush Senior) was a children of the Cold War. And he saw Putin for what he was. Therefore, that historical bias that he had did help shape his foreign policy toward Ukraine & Russia, eventhough it was clumsy at times in hindsight in some occasions.

 

 

On the other hand Bush Junior and largely Obama did not see that. Well Obama just pretended Putin was not there and gave the dossier to Vice President Biden. And lastly Trump had a different way of handling things (i.e transactional).

[Spekulatius]

22 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

I do agree with @cubsfan and his comment about Trump. Like it or not, hate him or not, Trump was a game changer. For better or worse.

 

 

That said, I also agree that Biden did stood up to Putin. Eventhough in hindsight he should not have said some of the thing he said on the eve of the invasion. Biden (much like McCain, or Bush Senior) was a children of the Cold War. And he saw Putin for what he was. Therefore, that historical bias that he had did help shape his foreign policy toward Ukraine & Russia, eventhough it was clumsy at times in hindsight in some occasions.

 

 

On the other hand Bush Junior and largely Obama did not see that. Well Obama just pretended Putin was not there and gave the dossier to Vice President Biden. And lastly Trump had a different way of handling things (i.e transactional).

Agree pretty much on everything. Unfortunately a lot of things from the 70's seems to come back - energy shortage (in some parts), inflation, cold war, decline of the big cities.

 

Some older folks may be more suited to understand the landscape than the younger ones who have seen none of this. But then again, I may be showing my own bias here.

[changegonnacome]

53 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

That said, I also agree that Biden did stood up to Putin.

 

Seen as some are beating up on Biden - I'll join in but care neither for Biden or Trump...put an electoral gun to my head I vote Biden all day long. 

 

Biden is/was perceived by Russia as a Ukraine 'hawk' in that under his watch as VP with portfolio responsibility for Ukraine under Obama....he was seen to have encouraged supported and maneuvered the most hard West pivot that Ukranian leadership had ever taken raising alarm in the Kremlin (if you care to look at it from a singular Russian security perspective). Add in the barisma stuff with Hunter....and you can see....if you pause for a moment and walk in a Russian's shoe for second....the strange feeling that Ukraine was becoming a US puppet state & Biden during his time as VP was chiefly responsible for what Mearsheimar refers to as "the leading Ukraine down the primrose path period" which is to encouraging them to pivot to us more completely as means by which WE ehanced our security in the West....better Ukraine is a western puppet state...than like Belarus a Russian puppet state.

 

When Biden assumed the presidency and given his prior Ukrainian portfolio responbilty and 8yrs a Ukraine hawk......paradoxically for all the Republicans out there that like to pretend that Russia invaded Ukraine because Biden is WEAK......they actually invaded Ukraine after he assumed the presidency because the calculation was that Biden was the most AGGRESSIVE i.e. hawkish president to sit in the Oval Office (vis a vie Ukraine's) in decades.

 

It's no coincidence that Russia invaded Ukraine a year after Biden's inauguration.....they perceived the most Ukrainian hawkish president in decades sitting in the oval office with potentially 8 full years in front of him to transform completely Ukraine into a Western bulwark on Russia's doorstep......a project he'd started as Vice President......or what we euphemistically call a vassal state.

 

I agree with a poster above.......Trump's transactional foreign relations stance......from a Russian standpoint was infinitely more preferable vis a vie Ukraine & Russian security concerns there......than Biden's Ukraine track record....and his idealistic/zealot democracy vs. autocracy rhetoric that characterized his first year in office.

 

Remember the "Summit for Democracy" in December 2021...three short months before Russia's Ukraine invasion:

 

Sitting in Beijing or the Kremlin....and you see the picture above.....you the know the 'deal' as Biden would say.....its projecting liberal democracy because you beleive in it but also because it hurts your enemies (Russia, China, Iran, N.Korea)...and that photo to an autocrat looks like a tonne of future mischief making by the new US president in your part of the world coming down the tracks!!!!!!! I assume Zelensky's in that photo somewhere? (EDIT: to answer my own question, he sure did attend...Ukraine released this statement that was translated and carried on US state departments website no less afterwards: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/UKRAINE-Summit-for-Democracy-Written-Commitment-eng-2021-12-20-Accessible-Final.pdf with this paragraph on the front page : "Ukraine is currently an outpost of democracy and freedom in Europe. For the eighth year in a row, Ukrainians are defending with arms not only their freedom, but the values of democracy and the free world")

 

In international relations - WEAK/STRONG leaders have different meanings depending on your viewpoint......Russia invaded Ukraine during Biden's presidency not because he was perceived to be weak but quite the opposite...Biden was intent, and his track record was flawless, on projecting US power via liberal democratic ideals in far flung regions.....all the better if that liberal democratic idealism also strategically weakened autocratic regimes that were US enemies. In this respect Putin the mad man, Putin the imperialist....is really Putin the calcuting statements (miscalculating for sure based on what happened)....but on Feb 2022 he made a deeply aggressive move to assert dominance on his Western flank. He miscalculated for sure based on subsequent events.......but the calculation contained undoubtedly the above variables....and Biden was a key part.....not because Biden is weak....but because Biden is strong (again weak/strong are subjective and I use them here in terms of a dove vs. a hawk on Ukraine).

Edited July 17, 2023 by changegonnacome

[cubsfan]

14 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Seen as some are beating up on Biden - I'll join in but care neither for Biden or Trump...put an electoral gun to my head I vote Biden all day long. 

 

Biden is/was perceived by Russia as a Ukraine 'hawk' in that under his watch as VP with portfolio responsibility for Ukraine under Obama....he was seen to have encouraged supported and maneuvered the most hard West pivot that Ukranian leadership had ever taken raising alarm in the Kremlin (if you care to look at it from a singular Russian security perspective). Add in the barisma stuff with Hunter....and you can see....if you pause for a moment and walk in a Russian's shoe for second....the strange feeling that Ukraine was becoming a US puppet state & Biden during his time as VP was chiefly responsible for what Mearsheimar refers to as "the leading Ukraine down the primrose path period" which is to encouraging them to pivot to us more completely as means by which WE ehanced our security in the West....better Ukraine is a western puppet state...than like Belarus a Russian puppet state.

 

When Biden assumed the presidency and given his prior Ukrainian portfolio responbilty and 8yrs a Ukraine hawk......paradoxically for all the Republicans out there that like to pretend that Russia invaded Ukraine because Biden is WEAK......they actually invaded Ukraine after he assumed the presidency because the calculation was that Biden was the most AGGRESSIVE i.e. hawkish president to sit in the Oval Office (vis a vie Ukraine's) in decades.

 

It's no coincidence that Russia invaded Ukraine a year after Biden's inauguration.....they perceived the most Ukrainian hawkish president in decades sitting in the oval office with potentially 8 full years in front of him to transform completely Ukraine into a Western bulwark on Russia's doorstep......a project he'd started as Vice President......or what we euphemistically call a vassal state.

 

I agree with a poster above.......Trump's transactional foreign relations stance......from a Russian standpoint was infinitely more preferable vis a vie Ukraine & Russian security concerns there......than Biden's Ukraine track record....and his idealistic/zealot democracy vs. autocracy rhetoric that characterized his first year in office.

 

Remember the "Summit for Democracy" in December 2021...three short months before Russia's Ukraine invasion:

 

Sitting in Beijing or the Kremlin....and you see the picture above.....you the know the 'deal' as Biden would say.....its projecting liberal democracy because you beleive in it but also because it hurts your enemies (Russia, China, Iran, N.Korea)...and that photo to an autocrat looks like a tonne of future mischief making by the new US president in your part of the world.

 

In international relations - WEAK/STRONG leaders have different meanings depending on your viewpoint......Russia invaded Ukraine during Biden's presidency not because he was perceived to be weak but quite the opposite...Biden was intent, and his track record was flawless, on projecting US power via liberal democratic ideals in far flung regions.....all the better if that liberal democratic idealism also strategically weakened autocratic regimes that were US enemies. In this respect Putin the mad man, Putin the imperialist....is really Putin the calcuting statements (miscalculating for sure based on what happened)....but on Feb 2022 he made a deeply aggressive move to assert dominance on his Western flank. He miscalculated for sure based on subsequent events.......but the calculation contained undoubtedly the above variables....and Biden was a key part.....not because Biden is weak....but because Biden is strong (again weak/strong are subjective and I use them here in terms of a dove vs. a hawk on Ukraine).

Biden has been a disaster for foreign policy. 20 years of holding Afghanistan & establishing a $1B military base - and the you GAVE it to the Taliban with weapons included - ALL because you wanted to have a parade on 9/11 !

 

Come on - deal in facts already- thousands of innocent civilians murdered because of Biden’s weakness. And he has your respect?Ask yourself this: what if Kennedy, Nixon or Carter had withdrawn from S. Korea after 20 years of hard earned gains?  
 

Where would S. Korea be?

 

What kind of slaughter would have happened?

 

All because the guy wanted to have a parade.

 

What do you think our allies and adversaries would think?

 

Putin’s answer: The time is now to take  Ukraine with Biden in charge 

[changegonnacome]

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

And he has your respect?

 

never said that - and I gave a facts based reasoning on Ukraine only....from a Russia perspective vis a vie Ukraine...and given Biden's hawkishness as VP in Ukraine portfolio......his ascension to the Presidency, from a Russia perspective was seen as a defacto ratcheting up of aggressiveness by the US. Weak/strong is very subjective word depending on view points....but make no mistake about it from a Russian perspective Biden was perceived to be a president more interested than Trump for sure in making aggressive maneuvers against the Kremlin via Ukraine dabbling.

 

Put crudely, from a Kremlin point of view, Trump was weak (in that he cared little for ratcheting up conflict with Russia via Ukraine) which suited Russia and Biden was perceived as strong as he was highly likely to do the opposite simply based on his hawkish/aggressive/"strong'/tough on Russia during his time as VP with responsibility for Ukraine....which did not suit narrow Russian regional interests at all.

 

The other stuff Afghanistan debacle etc - not going there its off topic.

[cubsfan]

Just now, changegonnacome said:

 

never said that - and I gave a facts based reasoning on Ukraine only....from a Russia perspective vis a vie Ukraine...and given Biden's hawkishness as VP in Ukraine portfolio......his ascension to the Presidency, from a Russia perspective was seen as a defacto ratcheting up of aggressiveness by the US. Weak/strong is very subjective word depending on view points....but make no mistake about it from a Russian perspective Biden was perceived to be a president more interested than Trump for sure in making aggressive maneuvers against the Kremlin via Ukraine dabbling.

 

Put crudely, from a Kremlin point of view, Trump was weak (in that he cared little for ratcheting up conflict with Russia via Ukraine) which suited Russia and Biden was perceived as strong as he was highly likely to do the opposite simply based on his hawkish/aggressive/"strong'/tough on Russia during his time as VP with responsibility for Ukraine....which did not suit narrow Russian regional interests at all.

 

The other stuff Afghanistan debacle etc - not going there its off topic.

You don’t want to go off topic because  President Biden is responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster in American history.

 

You think our allies and adversaries are stupid. 
 

They aren’t. And Putin & Xi aren’t.

[changegonnacome]

6 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

You don’t want to go off topic because  President Biden is responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster in American history.

 

I think you have me confused.....I dont love Biden and I didn't/dont hate/love Trump either....I'm agnostic & try to be objective on whoever the President happens to be and call it on a policy by policy decision.....based on the tenor & tone of your posts I get the sense that you might find it hard to write a bad thing about Trump or conversely a good thing about Biden. I rarely get into discussions with anybody on politics when I spot somebody's inability to praise or denigrate a president. I hear tribal drums when I read your posts, maybe I'm wrong on that.....but either way I'm not interested in having a discussion in REAL life that sounds like the nonsense that's on MSNBC or Fox News.

[cubsfan]

I’m not confused at all. 
 

You duck the issues - that’s all .

 

Every US President since Eisenhower, regardless of party, understood if you cut and run out of S. Korea that you would have a massive bloodbath and set S. Korea back 100 years. No more Samsung or Kia , etc…. With MINIMAL maintenance and no loss of life, you could hold your gains until such time Korea could defend itself from a lunatic regime.

 

Its the identical situation in Afghanistan, but you have a US administration that is SO reckless - that it literally destroyed Kabul and 20 years of work.

 

Putin sees it - take his opportunity- and you have a catastrophic situation in Ukraine.

 

But Biden, of course, is the right man for the job. Hilarious.

 

Biden destroyed confidence in the US in the eyes of the world.

Edited July 17, 2023 by cubsfan

[changegonnacome]

@cubsfan Tell me one economic or military policy where the Trump administration was completely and utterly off the charts reckless/stupid/misguided on and then tell me one area where Biden has done an outstanding job, nailing it so to speak.

Edited July 17, 2023 by changegonnacome

[Spekulatius]

Kerch bridge hit again. More than a scratch, I think:

 

[cubsfan]

@changegonnacome It’s not about party lines. I voted for Obama his first term. I was a big Bill Clinton fan for years. I was not a Trump fan during the primaries. His actions as President made me a big fan.
 

Obama’s foreign policy was weak. Biden’s is just insane.

Edited July 17, 2023 by cubsfan

[cubsfan]

My point on Ukraine has always been about weak foreign policy AND weak leaders. You get peace through strength. There is NO question who possesses the military strength - a combined Europe & US can not be defeated. 
 

But France, Germany & the US did not establish a real red line for Putin in Europe - you have your catastrophe. Putin played Obama. The Biden family helped themselves to Ukraine money.

Biden showed no stomach for a fight in Kabul. Europe dithered.

 

It’s a clear failure of leadership. It has nothing to do with military might. It has nothing to do with party preference.

Now, after the obvious failures, it has to be undone. Congratulations President Biden.

 

[Xerxes]

To be fair, the struggle in the Korean Peninsula was between state actors. 
 

The struggle in Afghanistan was between a an internal foe that had a free hand in most of Afghanistan (outside the two big cities)

[cubsfan]

^^^^ Correct - but the struggle in Afghanistan was about controlling a regime that helped bring down the twin towers. It WAS under control. Then an American President handed control right back to the regime. 

 

 

[Spekulatius]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

^^^^ Correct - but the struggle in Afghanistan was about controlling a regime that helped bring down the twin towers. It WAS under control. Then an American President handed control right back to the regime. 

 

 

The exit from Afghanistan was decided  by the Trump administrated and executed under Biden (poorly).

 

In foreign politics there is much more continuity than disruption. One reason is most presidential candidates get elected for the domestic agenda, not the foreign one, so the foreign one is mostly an afterthought until they take office and then the path of least resistance is just to continue.

The trade war with China was started under Trump and continued under Biden without meeting a pause. It will be continued by the next administration whoever that might be. Same thing with Ukraine.

Edited July 17, 2023 by Spekulatius

[cubsfan]

Trump’s wind down in Afghanistan resulted in no dead Americans for 18 months and stability in Kabul. His statement was to withdraw ONCE the domestic Afghan forces could provide their own security under the few thousand remaining American forces. Joe Biden threw away Trump’s plan in favor of his own - a lightening withdrawal to meet a 9/11 parade deadline.

 

Against the wishes of his military advisors. 
 

Biden’s plan was Biden plan only.

 

He was handed a stable plan on a silver platter in Afghanistan by his predecessor

[Spekulatius]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

Trump’s wind down in Afghanistan resulted in no dead Americans for 18 months and stability in Kabul.

Fact-check and Reuters says you are wrong:

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/instagram-post-wrong-on-u-s-casualties-in-afghanistan/

[cubsfan]

^^^ oh, sorry , huge error on my part.

 

4 killed in combat in that period , not zero. You might call that period “relatively peaceful “.

 

But Biden definitely wins with 13 Americans killed in 1 day. 
 

My bad!

Edited July 17, 2023 by cubsfan

[Ulti]

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/why-trump-killed-tpp-why-it-matters-you-n710781…..

This trade agreement would have cut China off at the pass 

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/politics/willow-project-oil-alaska-explained-climate/index.html

Biden might be starting to see the Energy light…

As an aside , they both suck for different reasons 

6 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

@cubsfan Tell me one economic or military policy where the Trump administration was completely and utterly off the charts reckless/stupid/misguided on and then tell me one area where Biden has done an outstanding job, nailing it so to speak.

[John Hjorth]

Gents,

 

Pardon me, but projecting the actual situation here in Europe with regard to Russia and Ukraine as of now into a discussion of a comparative analysis of past and incumbent US Presidential stupidity is actually to me a bit entertaining, to say the least. 

 

The majority of the fools, not reacting timely, sufficent and with measured and appropriate responses, are on the other side of the Atlantic pond, I would say.

 

Thank you for your support in these times.