Is Biden Trying To ‘Out-Hawk’ Trump On Foreign Policy?

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | Is Biden Trying To ‘Out-Hawk’ Trump On Foreign Policy?

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #331595
      N2Doc
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 7,214

      snip:

      Biden’s known foreign policy advisers are a who’s who of the foreign policy establishment. Recent comments by some high-profile members of Biden’s brain trust show an undiminished, and decidedly unprogressive, enthusiasm for regime change wars, sanctions, and nuclear weapons.

      Biden’s top foreign policy adviser, former deputy secretary of state Antony Blinken, recently expressed his regret that the Obama administration didn’t do enough to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria. Clearly he would like a second bite at the apple. And in a recent discussion hosted by the American Jewish Committee (AJC), Blinken promised that a Biden administration would keep in place all U.S. sanctions on Iran, including the ones that were put in place by Trump, in violation of the terms of the Iranian nuclear accord. Music to AIPAC’s ears.

      Meanwhile, two other Biden advisers, former Defense Department officials Jim Townsend and Michelle Flournoy, recently took to the pages of Der Spiegel to argue against a proposal by the chairman of the social democrats in the Bundestag to remove American nuclear weapons from Germany. Townsend and Flournoy write that the very idea of a Germany without the capacity to drop nuclear bombs “strikes at the heart of the trans-Atlantic bargain.” The idea that Germany might (quite understandably) want to free itself from such a Strangelovian “bargain” left the two former Pentagon officials aghast.

      Even worse, as The Atlantic’s Peter Beinart points out, “Instead of challenging the Pentagon’s sky-high budget, Biden’s highest-profile foreign-policy foray since clinching the Democratic nomination has been to try to out-hawk Donald Trump on China.”

      more

      https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-biden-trying-to-out-hawk-trump-on-foreign-policy/

    • #331607
      Punxsutawney
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 1,547

      He’s just being his true self. There’s plenty of mouthpieces for the MIC that have been pumping him up and drooling over his candidacy for a long time now.

      In America, “Liberty” means “Free to Die in Service of Capital” - Amfortas the hippie

    • #331624
      djean111
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,933

      He is proud of that, and has no plans to change.

    • #331633
      Ohio Barbarian
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 13,851

      His record and his actions did that all on their own.

      It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

      If Democrats don’t stand for the people, why should people stand for them?--Jim Hightower

    • #331659
      Satan
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,026

      And yes, that includes Joe Biden. They should NOT be allowed to hold any sort of government position ever again.

      PNAC is Treason. That used to be a death penalty offense, but I know most of you mortals are opposed to capital punishment, so I’m fine with life in prison without parole for all of them.

      After they die in prison, then they become subjects of an entirely different judicial system, of course……

      "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable". - John F. Kennedy

    • #331940
      peacecorps
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,938

      The planes bombing Yemen do not have American insignia on them but we sold them to SA and supply the fuel and bombs that those planes rain on the Yemeni people. Israel is using its military superiority to redraw national boundaries and we blindly support them. The HUGE increase in military spending that Trump loves to crow about is not a sign of being a war-hawk? I think Bernie and many progressives would say that it is.

      Regardless of what Mr. Blinken says, the odds that the US will not revisit the Iran nuclear deal that Obama negotiated are low.

      I understand that the American Conservative probably wants Trump to be reelected and dividing and weakening your main opposition is a tried-and-true campaign strategy for any politician.

      To be fair, as vice president, Biden did at times show instincts that aligned with progressives and anti-interventionists: he opposed the 2009 “surge” in Afghanistan; advised against the disastrous intervention in Libya; and acknowledged the role of the Gulf State tyrannies in supporting ISIS (which he was later forced to walk back in humiliating fashion). So progressives are right to think that the battle over foreign policy is one worth fighting.

      Indeed, dozens of progressive and antiwar groups are actively pushing Biden to embrace a more realistic and restrained foreign policy. The group Demand Progress recently released an open letter signed by 50 national organizations that called on Biden to reject the ingrained militarism of the establishment and pursue “a more just and progressive U.S. foreign policy.”

      I would hope that ‘progressive and antiwar groups’ are also pushing Trump ‘to embrace a more realistic and retrained foreign policy’ and ‘reject the ingrained militarism of the establishment and pursue “a more just and progressive U.S. foreign policy.” Or do they think that is a hopeless task?

      They are called 'human' rights not "if politicians do not feel threatened" rights. Many politicians see national sovereignty/security as more important because they protect their power and wealth. Human rights often do just the opposite.

      National issues (slavery/racism, income inequality, pandemics and pathetic health care, weak unions) are not solved with more states' rights. Global problems (climate change, migration, trade, war, pandemics) are not resolved with more national sovereignty.

    • #331942
      djean111
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,933

      Believing even one word of a Democratic politician’s campaign pandering is ludicrous.  All designed for votes.  The Democratic Party platform has long ago been dismissed by one and all (with at least two brain cells) as a joke.    Threatening to not vote for them the NEXT time goes beyond stupidity into the realms of hilariousness.  Lucy will always always pull that football away.  Always.  And Pelosi will smile as she eats her ice cream.

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.