Is It A ‘Gaffe’ Or Dementia?

I know that many conservs want the answer to Biden’s recent comments to be dementia because of his advanced age…..and others are saying that ‘Uncle Joe’ is doing what he does best….gaffs……

I am talking about his most recent statement about his desire to protect Taiwan from any incursion by China….

In case you live under a ignorance rock…….

So has US policy toward Taiwan changed or not? “No,” President Biden declared Tuesday when asked that specific question, reports the AP. But Biden’s comments the previous day still seem to have muddied the water on what the US would do if China were to invade the self-governing island.

  • The comments: In his prepared remarks on Monday, Biden was sufficiently vague on how the US would react to a Chinese takeover of Taiwan, in sync with the decades-long policy that has come to be known as “strategic ambiguity.” But when asked by a reporter if the US was “willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that,” Biden replied, “Yes.”
  • A pattern: His comments had White House officials scrambling to clarify that US policy has not changed, and Peter Baker at the New York Times notes this appears to be a regular feature of the current White House—as when Biden ad-libbed that Vladimir Putin should not remain in power. “Each time he says what he really thinks, there is the ritual cleanup brigade dispatched by the White House to pretend that he did not really say what he clearly articulated—or that even if he did, it did not really amount to a change in policy,” writes Baker. “But then Mr. Biden, unperturbed and unapologetic, goes out and does it all over again.” This is, in fact, the third time Biden has made such remarks on Taiwan.
  • Dead or no? Views are split on what Biden’s comments mean. “Strategic ambiguity is over,” writes Georgetown professor Matthew Kroenig. “Strategic clarity is here. This is the third time Biden has said this. Good. China should welcome this. Washington is helping Beijing to not miscalculate.” On the other hand, Harvard’s Lev Nachman doesn’t see a reversal. “Strategic ambiguity is about under what conditions the US would intervene in a war over Taiwan, not a flat out refusal to answer if it would intervene,” he writes. Biden’s language, however, was “sloppy,” he adds.
  • In the middle? An analysis at the Washington Post by Adam Taylor looks at whether this might simply be a gaffe by a president long known for making them or a deliberate shift in policy, but also floats the idea of a something in between those two things: “Perhaps the most persuasive idea about Biden’s comments is that this is still ‘strategic ambiguity,’ just with a new, harder spin.”
  • One fear: An assessment by Phelim Kine at Politico notes that some fear Biden’s seemingly more aggressive stance might provoke China into making a preemptive move on Taiwan. On Monday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin warned that Beijing “will take firm actions to safeguard its sovereignty and security interests.” The analysis also notes that nothing currently on the books, including the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act and the 1982 Six Assurances, “specifically obligate” the US to intervene militarily.
  • A gripe: “Does anyone at the #WhiteHouse actually respect the words of @POTUS?” tweeted GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger after staffers clarified Biden’s Monday comments. “Biden said we would defend #Taiwan, and the staff AGAIN walks back the Presidents own words! He needs to fire everyone who does this.”

It is neither….dementia or a gaff….it is Biden signaling the defense industry that the cash will continue to be thrown in their direction.

Ukraine well is running dry so a new excuse to piss away money is needed quickly….and Biden provided that excuse.

9/11 provided the perfect excuse for the wasting of taxpayer cash…national security…..

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

“Time To Negotiate”

After months of chest thumping on the war in Ukraine the press has seen the conflict winding down and now they change their tune to call for negotiations to begin…..

NY Times has issued their thoughts…..

A week ago we noted that a May 11 New York Times news article, documented that all was not going well for the US in Ukraine and that a companion opinion piece hinted that a shift in direction might be in order.

Now on May 19, “THE EDITORIAL BOARD,” the full Magisterium of the Times, has moved from hints to a clarion call for a change in direction in an editorial uninformatively titled, “The War Is Getting Complicated, and America Isn’t Ready.” From atop the Opinion page the Editorial board has declared that “total victory” over Russia is not possible and that Ukraine will have to negotiate a peace in a way that reflects a “realistic assessment” and the “limits” of US commitment. The Times serves as one the main shapers of public opinion for the Elite and so its pronouncements are not to be overlooked lightly.

Ukrainians will have to adjust to US “limits” and make sacrifices for newfound US realism

The Times May editorial dictum contain the following key passages:

In March, this board argued that the message from the United States and its allies to Ukrainians and Russians alike must be: No matter how long it takes, Ukraine will be free. …”

“That goal cannot shift, but in the end, it is still not in America’s best interest to plunge into an all-out war with Russia, even if a negotiated peace may require Ukraine to make some hard decisions (emphasis, jw).”

To ensure that there is no ambiguity, the editorial declares that:

“A decisive military victory for Ukraine over Russia, in which Ukraine regains all the territory Russia has seized since 2014, is not a realistic goal. … Russia remains too strong…”

To make cerain that President Biden and the Ukrainians understand what they should do, the EDITORIAL BOARD goes on to say:

New York Times Repudiates Drive for ‘Decisive Military Victory’ in Ukraine, Calls for Peace Negotiations

Writers like myself have been calling for this for months now and we were ignored….maybe now with ahe early war cheer leaders will fall into line. major news source tiring of the reports on the war will find more receptive audience.

But I ask ‘why now’?  I mean why after half of country has been destroyed is it important now?

I am waiting to see how many of the early war mongers will fall into line with the prospect of talks.

But MSM should not worry…they always have Taiwan.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”