Team Biden: Neocon Light?

[TV and credit cards]

Yeah, no less instrumental than Obama who let neocons to try to regime change Assad with the help from ISIS.
US presidents are mostly figure heads, they don't have original thoughts, especially when it comes to foreign policy. They rely on "experts" and foreign policy "experts" are all neocons.

The last thing a good leader is is a person who surrounds their self with and takes advice from experts. A good leader surrounds their self with people most agreeable with *dear leader’s held opinions.


*So I shouldn’t have to inform you this is sarcasm.

He nominated Nuland ("Fuck the EU" girl) That's all you need to know about his diplomatic instincts.

Consider the source of the leak. Rebukes were largely perfunctory. Diplomatic faux pas happen from time to time. This was little more than a reminder that Vlad has weaponized social media in his continued assault on democracies.

 

[barbos]

Yeah, no less instrumental than Obama who let neocons to try to regime change Assad with the help from ISIS.
US presidents are mostly figure heads, they don't have original thoughts, especially when it comes to foreign policy. They rely on "experts" and foreign policy "experts" are all neocons.

The last thing a good leader is is a person who surrounds their self with and takes advice from experts. A good leader surrounds their self with people most agreeable with *dear leader’s held opinions.

*So I shouldn’t have to inform you this is sarcasm.

She is full of shit, all neocons are.

He nominated Nuland ("Fuck the EU" girl) That's all you need to know about his diplomatic instincts.

Consider the source of the leak. Rebukes were largely perfunctory. Diplomatic faux pas happen from time to time. This was little more than a reminder that Vlad has weaponized social media in his continued assault on democracies.

You completely missed the point. Even without this mishap she was Dick Cheney girl, worst of the worst of the neocons.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I even gave money for Biden's election, and yes he is a 1,000 times better than FFvC. However, even though I wouldn't use the word 'progressive' as my political label, this article is a decent summery of my brewing frustration of getting yet another Democratic President that seems to be heading down the Neocon light path. FFvC pooched our deal with Iran every way he could. Biden is demanding that Iran take the first steps towards a return to the deal. WTF? We bombed yet again in Syria where we have no legal bases to have any military operations, and we lecture China on a "rules-based order that maintains global stability"? And why would Biden nominate Victoria Nuland as undersecretary of state for political affairs. A few months in, and I'm unimpressed...

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2021/03/...m-a-centrist-democrat-they-make-him-a-neocon/

My own initial analysis of Biden’s foreign policy outlook pinned him as a classical Democrat, but his first moves put him further and well beyond the center to the right than what generally defines a classical foreign policy Democrat.

Humanitarian reasons as a justification for the use of force is what separates hawkish centrist Democrats from the neocons on the right. And that’s not a small difference. For neocons, spreading democracy and regime change suffices. But that’s not the case for Democrats. The Biden Administration knows this very well. That’s why what counts as “humanitarian” in Syria is key for the Biden Administration and that’s why “humanitarian” is getting a very ugly, tortured reading in the first State Department statements. This week the State Department’s Spokesperson Ned Price tweeted that the State Department commemorates the one year anniversary of the death of 33 Turkish soldiers who “lost their lives protecting innocent Syrian civilians in Idlib from the brutality of the Assad regime and its Russian and Iranian backers”.

A refresher on Nuland:
https://asiatimes.com/2021/03/bidens-firing-squad-stands-in-a-circle/

As I wrote in a March 19 commentary (“Life after death for the neoconservatives”), the nomination of neo-conservative Victoria Nuland as undersecretary of state for political affairs will be read in Moscow as well as European capitals as a declaration of intent for regime change in Russia. Ms. Nuland was prominently associated with America’s 2014 involvement in the Maidan coup in Ukraine, which Nuland and others in the US security establishment hoped would be repeated in Moscow.

In a two party system there's no incentive for either party to be very different from the other. They need to be only slightly different in order to win. One slightly to the left. The other slightly to the right. In USA voting won't make much difference in the short term. It's only if either party starts winning consistently over time you'll see any major or lasting change.

 

[funinspace]

I even gave money for Biden's election, and yes he is a 1,000 times better than FFvC. However, even though I wouldn't use the word 'progressive' as my political label, this article is a decent summery of my brewing frustration of getting yet another Democratic President that seems to be heading down the Neocon light path. FFvC pooched our deal with Iran every way he could. Biden is demanding that Iran take the first steps towards a return to the deal. WTF? We bombed yet again in Syria where we have no legal bases to have any military operations, and we lecture China on a "rules-based order that maintains global stability"? And why would Biden nominate Victoria Nuland as undersecretary of state for political affairs. A few months in, and I'm unimpressed...

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2021/03/...m-a-centrist-democrat-they-make-him-a-neocon/


A refresher on Nuland:
https://asiatimes.com/2021/03/bidens-firing-squad-stands-in-a-circle/

In a two party system there's no incentive for either party to be very different from the other. They need to be only slightly different in order to win. One slightly to the left. The other slightly to the right. In USA voting won't make much difference in the short term. It's only if either party starts winning consistently over time you'll see any major or lasting change.

I would agree with that in general. However, Clownstick was an abnormality (though the Repugs seems to be shifting towards this being their new normal). It would be reasonable for Biden's team to at least shift back towards the prior 'normal' of Obama, where we made a deal with Iran.

 

[Elixir]

I even gave money for Biden's election, and yes he is a 1,000 times better than FFvC. However, even though I wouldn't use the word 'progressive' as my political label, this article is a decent summery of my brewing frustration of getting yet another Democratic President that seems to be heading down the Neocon light path. FFvC pooched our deal with Iran every way he could. Biden is demanding that Iran take the first steps towards a return to the deal. WTF? We bombed yet again in Syria where we have no legal bases to have any military operations, and we lecture China on a "rules-based order that maintains global stability"? And why would Biden nominate Victoria Nuland as undersecretary of state for political affairs. A few months in, and I'm unimpressed...

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2021/03/...m-a-centrist-democrat-they-make-him-a-neocon/


A refresher on Nuland:
https://asiatimes.com/2021/03/bidens-firing-squad-stands-in-a-circle/

In a two party system there's no incentive for either party to be very different from the other. They need to be only slightly different in order to win. One slightly to the left. The other slightly to the right. In USA voting won't make much difference in the short term. It's only if either party starts winning consistently over time you'll see any major or lasting change.

I would agree with that in general. However, Clownstick was an abnormality (though the Repugs seems to be shifting towards this being their new normal). It would be reasonable for Biden's team to at least shift back towards the prior 'normal' of Obama, where we made a deal with Iran.

I have been of similar mind to you, funinspace. But I perked up a little when Joe made some semi-threatening comments regarding the filibuster. I don't believe he is going to be able to bluff any Republicans into going against the will of the fat orange moron who controls their voters, so we shall see if Biden can get Manchin and Sinema on board to do a little, uh ... re-modeling of the Senate. There is only about a year and a half to get it done, so we will know soon. If he doesn't, a backslide into Trumpism and the dismantling of American democracy is all but inevitable

 

[barbos]

You people think that US foreign policy has something to do with parties, it does not.
Both parties are neocons when it comes to foreign policies. US president does not control it, unelected "experts" control it. Politicians who usually end up being presidents do not nave understanding nor interests in foreign policies. They can start a war here and there to help them with elections, say few stern words to the usual suspects and that's about it. The american public does not care about it.

 

[fromderinside]

He nominated Nuland ("Fuck the EU" girl) That's all you need to know about his diplomatic instincts.

You just used an off-hand comment to discredit a qualified candidate for a position. That says a lot about your qualifications as a commentator.

 

[barbos]

He nominated Nuland ("Fuck the EU" girl) That's all you need to know about his diplomatic instincts.

You just used an off-hand comment to discredit a qualified candidate for a position. That says a lot about your qualifications as a commentator.

I merely reminded her most memorable "accomplishment". Others include Iraq, Syria and of course coup in Ukraine.
If creating shit and despair all over the world is your goal then yes, she is qualified.

 

[funinspace]

You people think that US foreign policy has something to do with parties, it does not.
Both parties are neocons when it comes to foreign policies. US president does not control it, unelected "experts" control it. Politicians who usually end up being presidents do not nave understanding nor interests in foreign policies. They can start a war here and there to help them with elections, say few stern words to the usual suspects and that's about it.

I realize that the Democrats also have neocon tendencies. However, I don't think they are driven in the same way or level as the Repugs. I would disagree that the President isn't in control, but they can most certainly cede their decision making to those "experts". Pres. Carter certainly didn't fit the neocon model very well, but then he was painted severely for having been on watch when the Federal Reserve had its final battle with stagflation.

The american public does not care about it.

Yes and no. Much of the American public doesn't care about those foreigners very much, but many do like the macho image of the US being tough and in control. And I think too many Democrats fear being painted as weak or soft by the Repugs...and then loosing elections. And both sides covet winning far too much over anything else.

 

[barbos]

Is Nuland a democrat? She and other fellow neocons "worked" for both democrats and republicans.
There is no difference. US foreign policy stays the same.

 

[Derec]

If only he was a Neocon!

But actions such as giving Yemen to Iran like Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Germany is not really a Neocon move.

 

[Derec]

Biden is also looking at restarting the Refugee programs in the US,

The so-called refugee program has degenerated into an Islamic mass migration program over the last 20 years. Who is getting in except Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans, Somalis and other assorted Muslims? There is a suburb of Atlanta where a lot of these "refugees" end up called Clarkston. It looks like a fundamentalist Islamic country. A lot of women in burqas and the like. I do not think the program is worth restarting in its present form.

 

[Derec]

Absolutely true. But demanding that Iran take the first steps back towards getting back within JCPOA is just stupid.

The JCPOA was just stupid, period. Removal of sanctions and suitcases of cash for, at most, a 15 year pause of the Iranian nuclear weapons program and zero concessions on missiles or Iranian running international terrorism via IRGC.

There is no "ton of fixing" required. Just a few clear steps back from Clownstick's Executive actions against Iran, to show a good faith effort to fix what we (the US) fucked up.

On the contrary. Von Clownstick was way too timid on Iran. Assassinating their terrorist in chief was a good first step, but Trump lacks any follow-through, ironically enough as a golf player.

 

[Derec]

Biden was never my idea of a good time, he's too old and too old school.

Even old Willie Brown knew - for a good time, you call Kamala.

I was greatly disappointed that the Democrats couldn't come up with anything better.

Bloomberg would probably have been better, but he got character assassinated by the 1/1024 Cherokee Princess.

I suppose it was naive of me to hope that Biden could capitalize on his history of helping make peace with Iran better than he seems to be doing. I realize he doesn't have a magic wand to get rid of the disaster that was Trump and the Republicans on the issue of Iran.

The biggest obstacle to peace with Iran is the current regime running Iran. I have no hopes of any meaningful rapprochement while the weird beards are running things in Tehran. And no, JCPOA wasn't it.

 

[Derec]

Yeah, no less instrumental than Obama who let neocons to try to regime change Assad with the help from ISIS.

Is that why US bombed the hell out of ISIS?

 

[Swammerdami]

The U.S. has been projecting power outside its borders at least since James Monroe. That's part of the definition of "great power." If we lump EVERYONE more militaristic than Bernie Sanders into a "neocon" heap, that word will cease to be meaningful. It seems good, here in the early days after Trump, to show our allies and enemies that a sane and strong U.S.A. is back in play.

I'm not expert on these matters but, as for Iran, we might hope that the U.S. will improve relations with Iran and that Biden's initial demands are a negotiating tactic. Is there anyone here who is privy to Presidential Briefings and can tell us otherwise?

Syria is a problem, but it was Trump's abandoning the Kurds and allowing Russia to increase its influence in Syria that was stupid and/or treasonous.

He nominated Nuland ("Fuck the EU" girl) That's all you need to know about his diplomatic instincts.

You just used an off-hand comment to discredit a qualified candidate for a position. That says a lot about your qualifications as a commentator.

fromderside's comment make sense to me. Is there any REAL reason to treat Nuland as of the same ilk as a Cheney or Bolton besides an out-of-context sound-bite, or a resumé bullet-point?

You people think that US foreign policy has something to do with parties, it does not.
Both parties are neocons when it comes to foreign policies. US president does not control it, unelected "experts" control it. Politicians who usually end up being presidents do not [h]ave understanding nor interests in foreign policies. They can start a war here and there to help them with elections, say few stern words to the usual suspects and that's about it. The american public does not care about it.

There may be some truth here. But I think leaders DO develop strong opinions on foreign policy. I would make a statement like the one I've bolded above, but about financial policies, NOT foreign policies. Obama and the D's deferred to Wall St. "experts" after the 2008 crisis; expect Wall St. to design its next financial bailout as well.

 

[barbos]

Yeah, no less instrumental than Obama who let neocons to try to regime change Assad with the help from ISIS.

Is that why US bombed the hell out of ISIS?

Did they?

 

[funinspace]

Yeah, no less instrumental than Obama who let neocons to try to regime change Assad with the help from ISIS.

Is that why US bombed the hell out of ISIS?

Did they?

Yes, that is why we (the US) let the Russians destroy a large convoy of oil tanker trucks that were regularly shipping oil from Syria to Turkey in 2015. We wanted to make sure the Russians could also get some good PR on the ISIS front, after all the heavy lifting we were doing... You don't think the US CIA/NSA et.al. didn't notice hundreds of ISIS controlled oil tanker trucks making deliveries to Turkey?

 

[Elixir]

Did they?

Yes, that is why we (the US) let the Russians destroy a large convoy of oil tanker trucks that were regularly shipping oil from Syria to Turkey in 2015. We wanted to make sure the Russians could also get some good PR on the ISIS front, after all the heavy lifting we were doing... You don't think the US CIA/NSA et.al. didn't notice hundreds of ISIS controlled oil tanker trucks making deliveries to Turkey?

I don't think that made the News in Russia.

 

[funinspace]

Did they?

Yes, that is why we (the US) let the Russians destroy a large convoy of oil tanker trucks that were regularly shipping oil from Syria to Turkey in 2015. We wanted to make sure the Russians could also get some good PR on the ISIS front, after all the heavy lifting we were doing... You don't think the US CIA/NSA et.al. didn't notice hundreds of ISIS controlled oil tanker trucks making deliveries to Turkey?

I don't think that made the News in Russia.

Which 'that' is that?

https://www.rt.com/news/322614-russian-warplanes-isis-oil-trucks/