Can Biden lead the free world at the time of existential challenge?

[myata]

Joe is a great talker, every word falls with at least five bucks of all-knowing wisdom, all set to write a bio of great achievements.

The job isn't done though, by far. And there's a problem.

It's the act, especially when needed decisively and firmly, that has been gone AWOL. The great words just wouldn't match the act, and the outcome.

He had the Ukrainian Lend Lease Act passed unanimously by the Senate in April of 2022. Exactly zero dollars went to defend democracy under it, before it expired the fall of 2023 almost two years on. And now he's down to playing the finger-pointing game, complaining and washing hands of responsibility.

He promised serious consequences for involvement of North Korea in the Putin's war. Un openly defied him by sending Putin massive stockpiles of weapons including ballistic missiles. Consequences: zero. Called (so called) "UN Security Council" session what's that - some joke?

United States is a guarantor of Ukraine's security and territorial integrity given in exchange for abandoning nuclear arms. What "security"? Where's "territorial integrity"? With examples like this, who will take U.S. word for its face value? With these facts before them, who in this world would let go of the nukes as opposed to getting them at the first opportunity? What message is Joe sending to the world here?

The Axis has grown in strength and influence and Biden's act has been nowhere near sufficient to limit and halt it.

It comes as a bizarre and already troubling picture: he says all those great words but the acts go almost opposite to them. Is it some supreme old gran wisdom, next to impossible to discern for uninitiated? Trying to outplay a brazen aggressive bully by enticing him with apparent weakness? Or indecision and inability to act? Or something more? According to this piece by Newsweek, Biden was one of the architects of the Obama's infamous "reset" idea with Putin, ignoring multiple concerns.

Is it as simple as him being afraid of Putin, hiding it behind those verbal performances?

This is not the way to stand and win an existential confrontation with the Axis of tyrants. Indecision and fear of a bold act does not win this kind of conflicts, we do not have to guess because there are the lessons of history right before our eyes. It didn't work back then, and there's no slightest indication that it could be working now. If Ukraine is let down and allowed to fall, emboldened and smelling the blood, the Axis will be on the threshold of NATO in no time. Taiwan, conflicts, testing grounds all around the globe would follow.

One cannot be blind so much to not see it. The logical answer that comes to mind is: fear and indecision. These are not the winning qualities of a Commander-in-Chief of the Free World in this kind of existential challenge. And I couldn't be at all sure what real value we can find and take from Joe's great speeches.

Edited January 7, 2024 by myata

[myata]

The situation weirdly and disturbingly reminds of the pre-WWII one: deflated and progressively impotent liberal elites, despite all the great talking, and the alternatives, only of a rising degree of insane. No good, sane exits for you here: this is how the Time has decided it. Great words never heard and taken into account.

"Europe's weak armed forces could be washed away by Russia": The Times

Unable or/and unwilling to fight, the West will be forced to renege and give up on its values and principles, peeled like an onion shell until nothing is left.

The time to stand up to the new existential challenge is here and now. The West needs leaders who can see, understand and have the will and resolve to act now. Tomorrow may be too late. In the evolution, there are no promises of a carefree future. Our ancestors learned it the hard way, but we have forgotten. Again.

[Rebound]

9 hours ago, myata said:

Joe is a great talker, every word falls with at least five bucks of all-knowing wisdom, all set to write a bio of great achievements.

The job isn't done though, by far. And there's a problem.

It's the act, especially when needed decisively and firmly, that has been gone AWOL. The great words just wouldn't match the act, and the outcome.

He had the Ukrainian Lend Lease Act passed unanimously by the Senate in April of 2022. Exactly zero dollars went to defend democracy under it, before it expired the fall of 2023 almost two years on. And now he's down to playing the finger-pointing game, complaining and washing hands of responsibility.

He promised serious consequences for involvement of North Korea in the Putin's war. Un openly defied him by sending Putin massive stockpiles of weapons including ballistic missiles. Consequences: zero. Called (so called) "UN Security Council" session what's that - some joke?

United States is a guarantor of Ukraine's security and territorial integrity given in exchange for abandoning nuclear arms. What "security"? Where's "territorial integrity"? With examples like this, who will take U.S. word for its face value? With these facts before them, who in this world would let go of the nukes as opposed to getting them at the first opportunity? What message is Joe sending to the world here?

The Axis has grown in strength and influence and Biden's act has been nowhere near sufficient to limit and halt it.

It comes as a bizarre and already troubling picture: he says all those great words but the acts go almost opposite to them. Is it some supreme old gran wisdom, next to impossible to discern for uninitiated? Trying to outplay a brazen aggressive bully by enticing him with apparent weakness? Or indecision and inability to act? Or something more? According to this piece by Newsweek, Biden was one of the architects of the Obama's infamous "reset" idea with Putin, ignoring multiple concerns.

Is it as simple as him being afraid of Putin, hiding it behind those verbal performances?

This is not the way to stand and win an existential confrontation with the Axis of tyrants. Indecision and fear of a bold act does not win this kind of conflicts, we do not have to guess because there are the lessons of history right before our eyes. It didn't work back then, and there's no slightest indication that it could be working now. If Ukraine is let down and allowed to fall, emboldened and smelling the blood, the Axis will be on the threshold of NATO in no time. Taiwan, conflicts, testing grounds all around the globe would follow.

One cannot be blind so much to not see it. The logical answer that comes to mind is: fear and indecision. These are not the winning qualities of a Commander-in-Chief of the Free World in this kind of existential challenge. And I couldn't be at all sure what real value we can find and take from Joe's great speeches.

Biden is supplying weapons to Ukraine. 
Trump would engineer Ukraine’s surrender.  
 

So the difference here is night and day.  

[myata]

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Biden is supplying weapons to Ukraine. 

But this isn't the correct answer. The correct answer is: all that is needed and when it was needed. Yes or no? No. He sat on a multi-billion lend lease program and haven't used a single cent of it. The much-needed equipment is decommissioned and is rotting, instead of helping in defending the democracy. Not some far-away mind you. Yours. The western world. Because of what? What was the argument? Senile indecision? An existential fear of a brutal thug?

Weakness or madness isn't a great dilemma. May not be any happy endings there.

[robosmith]

7 minutes ago, myata said:

But this isn't the correct answer. The correct answer is: all that is needed and when it was needed. Yes or no? No. He sat on a multi-billion lend lease program and haven't used a single cent of it. The much-needed equipment is decommissioned and is rotting, instead of helping in defending the democracy. Not some far-away mind you. Yours. The western world. Because of what? What was the argument? Senile indecision? An existential fear of a brutal thug?

Weakness or madness isn't a great dilemma. May not be any happy endings there.

Perhaps you don't know what you're talking about and Ukraine wants and needs ADVANCED weaponry, NOT "equipment is decommissioned and is rotting."

[Rebound]

5 minutes ago, myata said:

But this isn't the correct answer. The correct answer is: all that is needed and when it was needed. Yes or no? No. He sat on a multi-billion lend lease program and haven't used a single cent of it. The much-needed equipment is decommissioned and is rotting, instead of helping in defending the democracy. Not some far-away mind you. Yours. The western world. Because of what? What was the argument? Senile indecision? An existential fear of a brutal thug?

Weakness or madness isn't a great dilemma. May not be any happy endings there.

No other nation has come remotely close to delivering the amount of military aid to Ukraine as the USA.  Why he did not lend or lease equipment may be that it cannot be returned or that Ukraine couldn’t be expected to repay. I don’t honestly know, but Biden has been pushing Congress continually for military aid to Ukraine and the GOP’s been putting on the brakes.  
 

I have studied International Relations. Republicans love to pretend that it’s very simple and based on “America does whatever the hell it wants and everybody does what we tell them,” but the real world doesn’t work that way.  Obviously.  

[myata]

28 minutes ago, Rebound said:

but Biden has been pushing

Yes he may be great at that, talking and "pushing". But of the Commander-in-Chief at a time of an existential challenge we expect more. It's in a different dimension of real though: not great words, but needed results.

If the West will begin falling to the dictator's alliance piece by piece who will be there to explain the importance of restraint and complexities of politics? Nobody. Doesn't exist. If you don't come to the fight with all you have, the result will be a failure; defeat; not "go back home and fix your errors". This chance just may not be there, nobody promised it.

[herbie]

Perhaps Myata would prefer WW III as a proper response.

[myata]

16 hours ago, herbie said:

Perhaps Myata would prefer WW III as a proper response.

That's a good one. So definitely Putin would very, very much love his opponents to see it that way and in that frame: a meek halfhearted dash at "supporting" nothing too serious though... or it's something terrible. For him it makes a lot of sense. For who else, though?

That's a great excuse right there, kudos! But wait.. does the Time accept those as valid tender? At what time could you explain indecisiveness and inaction, at a critical point of history by caution and wisdom and It like, OK sure buddy, I'm in the wrong here. Are we pipe dreamin, again? All the way till the reality knocks right on our door? Not when we can choose to stand by our words and principles, but being dragged into the fight that cannot be avoided, no chance kicking and screaming?

Edited January 8, 2024 by myata

[myata]

20 hours ago, herbie said:

WW III as a proper response.

Let's try to think of it this way: how is going to go on, continue? The wise caution strategy I mean. So you fail those who would actually stand up, and then what: next? Where will it go?

The bully goes back home, stuffed and satisfied; the things return to their normal cycle, you know partying, spending countless dough on useless stuff, talking issues to death in "security councils"? That kind of rosy fantasy, as it happened always and every time in our history?

Or, having digested the latest victim, the bully shows up on your doorstep, next? And what then? Where would all the great wisdom go? In front of whom to wring thin shaking hands, cry and swear of great caution and restraint, the avoidance of you know? Who will attend the show and give it five star marks for thoughtfulness? This is exactly how it happened the last time, by the way. Whoever needed to think one step ahead.

[CdnFox]

Can Biden lead the free world at the time of existential challenge?

It depends on some key variables.  Will there be stairs involved?

[herbie]

You worry about Biden, the one actually DOING something.

Perhaps you'd rather see Trump give away half of Ukraine and wave a paper to the cameras that 'guarantees peace in our time'?

Maybe spell out exactly what you think should be happening.

[Nationalist]

On 1/7/2024 at 1:00 PM, myata said:

But this isn't the correct answer. The correct answer is: all that is needed and when it was needed. Yes or no? No. He sat on a multi-billion lend lease program and haven't used a single cent of it. The much-needed equipment is decommissioned and is rotting, instead of helping in defending the democracy. Not some far-away mind you. Yours. The western world. Because of what? What was the argument? Senile indecision? An existential fear of a brutal thug?

Weakness or madness isn't a great dilemma. May not be any happy endings there.

I never know precisely what you're saying but, are you saying you think Biden and NATO should have attacked Russia?

[myata]

9 hours ago, herbie said:

You worry about Biden, the one actually DOING something.

"Something" may not be enough, you may know it from your daily life, no? What if you're trying to run out of a juggernaut's way, but can only walk "some" distance? Would it help, in the final analysis?

The f@cking dilemma, look we're doing "something", or see, I just want to go insane, try to stop me. That has to mean something. It happened exactly like this the last time, and there was no good exit. Ooh.

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Biden and NATO should have attacked Russia?

ignored as bombastic nonsense, why would anyone bother? Try talking to Vivek.

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, myata said:

"Something" may not be enough, you may know it from your daily life, no? What if you're trying to run out of a juggernaut's way, but can only walk "some" distance? Would it help, in the final analysis?

The f@cking dilemma, look we're doing "something", or see, I just want to go insane, try to stop me. That has to mean something. It happened exactly like this the last time, and there was no good exit. Ooh.

ignored as bombastic nonsense, why would anyone bother? Try talking to Vivek.

Then what are you saying, mushmouth?

[WestCanMan]

On 1/7/2024 at 12:04 AM, myata said:

Joe is a great talker, every word falls with at least five bucks of all-knowing wisdom,

"Nexelsrent".

You owe me 5 bucks. 

[WestCanMan]

@myata Joe Biden was never a wise and decent man - the infamous crime bill that he co-authored is incontrovertible evidence of that fact - and now he's an evil little creeper who's clearly suffering from dementia.

They can revive his old dead ass for about 20 minutes a day, then they put him on ice while unelected DNC operatives run the country from the shadows.

His blatant weakness has left the free world rudderless, and in the power vacuum war and chaos have taken over.

America's enemies are surging while the Dems are tearing the USA apart from the inside with their avid support of fun stuff like racial riots, violent crime in general, illegal immigration, large-scale robberies, and the political persecution of political rivals.

FYI one of the main identifying symptoms of dementia - which he is clearly experiencing - is irrational outbursts of anger: does that fit the character profile of the guy that you want holding the codes to the deadliest stockpile of nukes on the planet?

That God-damned twit is dumb enough to nuke Texas. 

I get that you guys hate Twump, but supporting Joe is sick and wrong. We both know that he's not going to be on the ballot, the DNC are prolonging this farce so that they can appoint their own chosen candidate in a shortened timeline, aka "with the least amount of democratic process possible". 

My guess is that they still fear the Bern because their entire party is such a clown car of disgraced losers that they make communism look like a beacon of hope. They know that they can't possibly conspire against him again without another round of email leaks, so a "truncated nomination process" (they cut out the democratic part) is their only real chance to derail him.

[Deluge]

On 1/7/2024 at 10:47 AM, Rebound said:

Biden is supplying weapons to Ukraine. 
Trump would engineer Ukraine’s surrender.  
 

So the difference here is night and day.  

Biden is a woke maniac. 

Trump is not. 

THAT is the difference. 

[myata]

Committees led by Republicans published in November of 2023 "The proposed plan for victory in Ukraine".

It correctly, and factually unavoidably identifies the rising coalition of tyrants: Russia; Belarus; North Korea; Iran and possibly, China as the principal, and possibly the ultimate threat to the Free World. Achieving a decisive victory in Ukraine is the quickest and most effective way to neutralize it.

Biden's administration has been persistent in avoiding decisive acts so far. The logic and reasons of insufficient action in contrast to great talking points are really obscure to me. One can guess old age indecision and reluctance of decisive acts. As a result of that lack of definitive position, not just Ukraine: we, the West as a whole can be at a tipping point into a future of rising darkness; violence and chaos.

Great wise talking will do nothing to hold it off, Joe.