Comments on: “Reset” Means Obedience

By: Jack2

Jack2 — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:26:28 +0000

Biden is trying to keep NATO expansion on track by belittling Russian economic and military capabilities. In other words, no need to fear a Russian backlash against NATO expansion. By speaking thus, he shores up support for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko and Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, presently under fire in their respective countries for their pro-NATO policies.

He is saying to the world in general that U.S. geopolitical objectives remain in place. So far, the Obama administration has done nothing to indicate otherwise.

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 03:54:22 +0000

By “forcing Russia to make accommodations to the west” what he really means is accepting AMERICAN hegemony. Biden is beginning to look like some weird cross between Cheney and McCain.

By: JJM lost his password again

JJM lost his password again — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:15:26 +0000

A gaffe is when someone accidentally tells the truth. Biden is just allowing us to hear what is said behind closed doors in the White House. That the administration believes it can leverage Russia’s economic problems for cooperation with the middle defense shield and NATO expansion is easy to believe. If you asked me what a centrist, “pragmatic” president would do given these circumstrances I would say that the administration would do what it is doing now, and Obama is nothing if not centrist and pragmatic.

What I’m most confused about is the connection between Russia’s economy and missle defense/NATO expansion. I mean, would Washington trade Georgia’s inclusion into NATO for no-strings money? Is Obama going to give Medvedev GM if the former is allowed to set up the missle shield? Or is there something more pedestrian that I’m missing, such as WTO loads or something?

By: Brett

Brett — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:54:02 +0000

What’s the deal with Biden and Obama’s message control anyways? This is the second time in the past few days that he’s made idiotic remarks, so why isn’t the Obama Administration trying to rein him in? Are they just that bad at it?

By: Rowan

Rowan — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 00:12:55 +0000

Biden inexplicably has a reputation in the media as a foreign policy expert. This reputation seems to be based on the fact that he talks a lot about foreign policy. The fact that he’s a total idiot on the subject doesn’t seem to matter – bear in mind that his “plan” for Iraq was to ethnically cleanse it into three countries, Kurd, Shia, and Sunni. Yeah, the Turks would have loved that….

By: Norwegian Shooter

Norwegian Shooter — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 23:05:15 +0000

Is Biden the public point man for Russia? He seems particularly unsuited for the role. I’m not sure Clinton would be any better, but she would have less gaffes at least.

I agree that the policy is more important than the pronouncements, but wouldn’t it help if Obama himself was the one talking to and about Russia? Besides being the big cheese, he has publicly stated nuclear disarmament as an important long range goal. If we got the policy right (along the lines in this post) he could sell it internally as the nukes are more import than NATO expansion, missile shield, etc.