~46~ Lame Duck Unfit Uncle Joe Biden ~46~

[cradleandshoot]

And finally, we don't hold other nation-states' coats; we have a multilateral agreement with, and deep and important bilateral ties with Germany. The point of that Agreement is, in part, economies of scale and geography and power. But your retreat from leadership is, as always, noted.

You have to admit that it's full on bananas that the American left and the American right has completely swapped places in less than four years when it comes to foreign entanglements.

.....ever since Vietnam, the American left's position is: "why are we fighting wars overseas? This isn't our problem. Let someone else deal with it"

Since Trump arrived, this is now the position of the American right.

Since Trump arrived, the America middle-left is upset that we're not taking the lead in every overseas conflict. (the far left still has no interest)

It's a bit bizarre, don't you think?

hmmm, let's see, who on the left is saying we should go to war with Russia over Ukraine?
Despite our commitments made when we persuaded them to give up all their nukes after the fall of the Soviet Union and they became an independent country?

I just haven't heard that from the left, though I suppose I might not be in the right media feeds to have heard it.

Seems to me that Ukraine has been provided much more military capacity over the past 7-8 years such that they can fight for themselves... and what the current Administration appears to be doing is signaling that we will do economic sanctions, not send troops or bombing runs, if Russia opens fire...maybe Biden threatened that as well, but that's not what I heard.

I'm not sure Biden's warnings will be enough, but it certainly sounds much more measured than if he and his Admin was actually threatening to go to war.

Or did I miss something?

I do agree that it's very weird that the right has adopted this very passive, or worse, appeasing attitude towards Russia. Of course, if one looks at the cover of NewsMax, it's pretty clear that what is being messaged on the hard right is affinity for white, nationalist, fascist style authoritarianism, wherever in the world. It's not as if America hasn't seen this same proclivity in the past, but it just wasn't so associated with the GOP.

"I'm not sure Biden's warnings will be enough, but it certainly sounds much more measured than if he and his Admin was actually threatening to go to war."
Biden is not in a position to threaten anyone. The Ukraine is looking much more like Poland just before Hitler invaded. Whatever Putin decides to do Joe Biden will to nothing. The Ukraine was a part of the old Soviet Union, Putin just wants it back in the fold. The time is ripe, Biden will look the other way. What else can he do other than a stern warning and some UN sanctions? I do wonder what Vlad will do with all that state of the art US equipment that will fall in his lap once he steamrolls Ukraine. We have given them some state of the art equipment that the Russians will very much appreciate coming in possession of.

[old salt]

For most of my adult life, the GOP has stood for a strong military and deep and meaningful relationships with our allies in Europe. The GOP's withdrawal into "America First," "Euroburgers," and a policy, under Trump, effectively "hands off the Russian oligarchy" is remarkable.

That was when we had real allies who were willing to sacrifice alongside us. Since the Wall came down, this version of NATO has atrophied into a marching & toasting society. It is an embarrassment compared to the NATO I served in.

We overreached. We pushed NATO eastward beyond our collective willingness or ability to defend it's borders. We humiliated & chopped up a weakened USSR in a manner sure to produce a revanchist nationalist Russia, determined to regain it's imperial glory. We supported multiple revolutions in the artificial contrived fractured nation of Ukraine without insisting that non-corrupt govts emerge. The artificial nation of Belarus is totally dependent upon Russia. Parts of Georgia are still occipied by Russia. The 'stans remain provinces of Moscow.

Other than Poland, the defense capability of our former Warsaw Pact NATO members has deteriorated greatly since they were Soviet sattelites, yet we continue to offer them a free ride as they remain dependent upon their Soviet era weapons. Putin watched all this happen. Now the bill is coming due.

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

[a fan]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

[cradleandshoot]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

The Russians are not a shadow of themselves when it comes to the number of tanks and heavy artillery and highly trained infantry they posses. They have an army custom designed to conquer a former Soviet satellite like the Ukraine. Vlad just has to decide what Biden will do. IMO, Biden has no idea how to respond to a Russian invasion of the Ukraine. It isn't like he has very many options to consider.

[lagerhead]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

[cradleandshoot]

The bottom line is that if Vlad wants to conquer the Ukraine, nothing Joe Biden says or does will prevent that from happening. Unless of course a stern warning will intimidate Vlad into backing down

[MDlaxfan76]

Seems to me that Ukraine has been provided much more military capacity over the past 7-8 years such that they can fight for themselves... and what the current Administration appears to be doing is signaling that we will do economic sanctions, not send troops or bombing runs, if Russia opens fire...maybe Biden threatened that as well, but that's not what I heard.

More like 4-5 years. Obama/Biden sent blankets. Trump sent Special Forces, Javelins & warships.

Not sure why it would matter, they're reportedly far better armed and trained, moreover the morale is way different, clarity of the population's view is way different than in 2014.

So, it would be a bloody fight. But presumably the Russians would roll, nevertheless. But pay a price in lives it's not clear would enhance Putin's position with the Russian populace. And that would get coupled with a very different economic posture from the West which would put a severe bite as well.

The one difference, politically in the US, is that the Trumpist right seems to want to appease/please Putin, Biden seems to disagree. But I don't hear anyone saying we should let loose the dogs of war from the US/NATO, though one could certainly argue that view based on prior promises made.

[MDlaxfan76]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

NATO is a union of those countries, capable of being funded by those countries, calling on the armed services of those countries...and there's no question as to whose aggregate capacity is greater.

Or do you disagree?

[a fan]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

It means Putin is playing the same game that the Soviets played-----using a ridiculous amount of GDP for shiny weapons that he doesn't need when he has a country that desperately needs that money elswhere. What good are the 64 submarines that Russia is maintaining? Are they keeping dolphins from attacking Vladivostok?

What happened to the Soviets? That's right, they went broke. They couldn't keep up with US spending. It's why I keep pointing out that there are two ends to the Nordstrom pipes......Putin get's F'ed if they're shut just as much as the other way around.

And no, Russia couldn't last an engagement with the US, let alone the rest of NATO.

This is why Obama said the 80's called, and want their foreign policy back. Putin can't turn back the hands of time. And if he gets too reckless? He has to answer to a nervous China.

[a fan]

The Russians are not a shadow of themselves when it comes to the number of tanks and heavy artillery and highly trained infantry they posses. They have an army custom designed to conquer a former Soviet satellite like the Ukraine. Vlad just has to decide what Biden will do. IMO, Biden has no idea how to respond to a Russian invasion of the Ukraine. It isn't like he has very many options to consider.

Sure he does. Biden would do the same thing as Trump.....sanctions. No one is going to war over Ukraine.

[MDlaxfan76]

For our friends on here who keep whining about Biden, NATO, euroburghers etc...what would you do in the POTUS' shoes? What would you do if you were Chairman of one of the relevant Senate or House Committees?

Sure, this is indeed a tough one.

But is appeasement of the aggressor the answer???

Is defunding NATO the answer???

Or is it just easier to whine and grouse and chew on your cuds?

[lagerhead]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

NATO is a union of those countries, capable of being funded by those countries, calling on the armed services of those countries...and there's no question as to whose aggregate capacity is greater.

Or do you disagree?

Disagree 100%. That union is fragile and held together by US funding and personnel. One of the previous administrations pillars was getting those countries to contribute more to NATO.

[MDlaxfan76]

The Russians are not a shadow of themselves when it comes to the number of tanks and heavy artillery and highly trained infantry they posses. They have an army custom designed to conquer a former Soviet satellite like the Ukraine. Vlad just has to decide what Biden will do. IMO, Biden has no idea how to respond to a Russian invasion of the Ukraine. It isn't like he has very many options to consider.

Sure he does. Biden would do the same thing as Trump.....sanctions. No one is going to war over Ukraine.

Would Trump actually do sanctions???

What's the zeitgeist on the Trumpist right?

hmmm, https://www.truthorfiction.com/the-news ... eat-cover/

[MDlaxfan76]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

NATO is a union of those countries, capable of being funded by those countries, calling on the armed services of those countries...and there's no question as to whose aggregate capacity is greater.

Or do you disagree?

Disagree 100%. That union is fragile and held together by US funding and personnel. One of the previous administrations pillars was getting those countries to contribute more to NATO.

And insulting them.

But his jawboning did have some positive effect.

But note, that Biden has taken a different tack, made clear that the US is fully committed to NATO and to multilateral cooperation, and the increases by European countries and Canada have continued and are committed to continue to increase.

Germany now pays the same percentage of NATO expenses (16%) as does the US, Great Britain 11% and so on.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44717074

[lagerhead]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

It means Putin is playing the same game that the Soviets played-----using a ridiculous amount of GDP for shiny weapons that he doesn't need when he has a country that desperately needs that money elswhere. What good are the 64 submarines that Russia is maintaining? Are they keeping dolphins from attacking Vladivostok?

What happened to the Soviets? That's right, they went broke. They couldn't keep up with US spending. It's why I keep pointing out that there are two ends to the Nordstrom pipes......Putin get's F'ed if they're shut just as much as the other way around.

And no, Russia couldn't last an engagement with the US, let alone the rest of NATO.

This is why Obama said the 80's called, and want their foreign policy back. Putin can't turn back the hands of time. And if he gets too reckless? He has to answer to a nervous China.

Look where our spending got us, what’s the deficit? Lot of military spending in those budgets passed previously. We’re broke too.

80’s we may actually go back there. Have we traded our limited wars in the ME for the Ukraine? Time will tell.

IMO China is biding its time to capitalize on rare earth minerals to strengthen their standing economically.

[lagerhead]

The NATO I served in was the strongest, most powerful & effective alliance in history. It has become a shell of it's former self.
Putin sees all this & is succeeding in keeping NATO weak, fractured & ineffective. This is just the latest chapter.

This is all true. But you're leaving out that Russia is also weak, fractured, and ineffective.

Italy has a higher GDP. So does Canada. UK's GDP is double what Russia's is.

Russia is a shadow of a shadow of the Soviet Union. Let's keep that in mind.

Can you expand on how GDP for a single country would relate to a military alliance. Does NATO have a GDP? Are you saying Russia has a weak GDP therefore wouldn’t be able to last with a NATO engagement?

NATO is a union of those countries, capable of being funded by those countries, calling on the armed services of those countries...and there's no question as to whose aggregate capacity is greater.

Or do you disagree?

Disagree 100%. That union is fragile and held together by US funding and personnel. One of the previous administrations pillars was getting those countries to contribute more to NATO.

the increases by European countries and Canada have continued and are committed to continue to increase.

Germany now pays the same percentage of NATO expenses (16%) as does the US, Great Britain 11% and so on.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44717074

It’s about time.

[cradleandshoot]

For our friends on here who keep whining about Biden, NATO, euroburghers etc...what would you do in the POTUS' shoes? What would you do if you were Chairman of one of the relevant Senate or House Committees?

Sure, this is indeed a tough one.

But is appeasement of the aggressor the answer???

Is defunding NATO the answer???

Or is it just easier to whine and grouse and chew on your cuds?

No whining my friend. If Vlad decides to take back the Ukraine there is nothing Joe Biden can or will do. This is Vlads call and he must be relishing in the fact he is holding all the cards. Maybe Joe should consult you for some advice? You normally have all the solutions.

[old salt]

For our friends on here who keep whining about Biden, NATO, euroburghers etc...what would you do in the POTUS' shoes? What would you do if you were Chairman of one of the relevant Senate or House Committees?

Sure, this is indeed a tough one.

But is appeasement of the aggressor the answer???

Is defunding NATO the answer???

Or is it just easier to whine and grouse and chew on your cuds?

I've already said what I'd do -- drag the leaders of our allies to the table with me, ask the Germans to lead, & let the world see lt.

Who's advocating defunding NATO ? We're still trying to get our free-riding allies to invest the agreed upon 2% of GDP in their own defense.
The 16 % you quoted for Germany's % of NATO expenses is a pittance & a deceptive diversion.
Those are NATO admin expenses, not an indication of military capability or the % of a country's GDP devoted to defense.

Ask Germany to commit to not turn on Nordstream 2 until Russian & Ukrainian forces are pulled back from a negotiated demilitarized zone between Russia & Ukraine. Propose Germany & Belarus provide troops to patrol the DMZ.

[a fan]

Look where our spending got us, what’s the deficit? Lot of military spending in those budgets passed previously. We’re broke too.

The difference is, we're not broke from spending.....we're broke from tax cuts.

Move our effective tax rates to where they were under Reagan. We'd be running a surplus all this time. We traded that all in for trickle down...that didn't trickle down.

80’s we may actually go back there. Have we traded our limited wars in the ME for the Ukraine? Time will tell.

Not a chance. Ask any of your conservative friends if they want to go to war over Ukraine.

When they say 'no", there's your answer. If conservatives said no? We wouldn't have gone to war anywhere but Afghanistan. And the only reason we had to go to Afghanistan was that conservatives wanted to invade Kuwait all those years ago.

That's the price we paid for wanting to be the world's cop, for good or bad. Now that Conservatives don't want to do that anymore, there's NO WAY we're going to Ukraine. Sanctions or bust.

IMO China is biding its time to capitalize on rare earth minerals to strengthen their standing economically.

We'll find better materials to use. We always do. Remember when whale oil was key?

[old salt]

the increases by European countries and Canada have continued and are committed to continue to increase.

Germany now pays the same percentage of NATO expenses (16%) as does the US, Great Britain 11% and so on.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44717074

It’s about time.

...you fell for the deceptive comparison.
The 16% is not the % of GDP (2% targert).
It only covers this. Not actual military capability.

Nato's annual budget and programmes come to about €2.5bn (£2.1bn; $3bn) overall, and there's an agreed cost sharing formula to pay for the running of things such as:

civilian staff and administrative costs of Nato headquarters
joint operations, strategic commands, radar and early warning systems, training and liaison
defence communications systems, airfields, harbours and fuel supplies
The cost sharing is based on national income.