Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[mtutiger]

6 hours ago, chasfh said:

An off-the-cuff remark, and an unserious one at that, is exactly why we have Space Force today.

This is what I meant in my previous post alluding to having to "walk on eggshells" with Putin...

Like, it is just really strange to see "peace through strength" conservatives treating Vlad like Billy Mumy's character in the Twilight Zone. All whole simultaneously calling POTUS response weak.

It just defies logic, kinda hard to engage on it really.

[ewsieg]

24 minutes ago, pfife said:

Who said it was our governments goal to do this publicly?

Umm, Joe Biden did.  What am I missing here?

[ewsieg]

16 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I dont even know that its that, the comment felt more directed to Eastern Europeans. As much controversy as it has generated here, I could see it being pretty popular in places like Warsaw (where he made the speech), Vilnius and Tallinn. All of whom (for existential reasons) are pretty hawkish on Russia policy.

I dont know the degree to which Americans get that... judging by the media's reaction, probably not much.

Oh come on.  Biden shouldn't have said it, to anyone.  Period, end of story.  Do I agree with it, yes, but as the head of state, it caused trouble.  His own administration is walking it back which they would only do if Biden himself realized it was a mistake as well. 

Overall, is it a huge mistake, no, especially with how his admin is walking it back.  But still, I feel like this spin from some that it's nothing is exactly what we all laughed at the Archie's/Stan's of the world where they would try and spin some Trump comment as some great strategic, well thought out plan.  

Biden made a mistake, it's not the end of the world.  His own administration is admitting it was a mistake based on their actions afterwards.  In the end, I just trust the folks Biden has assembled to be able to handle a speech gaffe and not allow it to modify policy.  Within a day or two, it'll blow over.

[mtutiger]

5 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Oh come on.  Biden shouldn't have said it, to anyone.  Period, end of story.  Do I agree with it, yes, but as the head of state, it caused trouble.  His own administration is walking it back which they would only do if Biden himself realized it was a mistake as well. 

Did you read my post at all?

My only point is that how the comment is recieved here may be a lot different than how it is in Warsaw or Tallinn.

It's a nuanced point that I don't believe warranted this kinda reaction

Edited March 28, 2022 by mtutiger

[ewsieg]

6 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Did you read my post at all?

My only point is that how the comment is recieved here may be a lot different than how it is in Warsaw or Tallinn.

It's a nuanced point that I don't believe warranted this kinda reaction

I did read it, and I don't think stating regime change when he's in a border country of Russia, or if he did it from the Oval office really makes any difference, nor does the audience.  It should not have been publicly stated anywhere, to any audience, period.  His own administration appears to agree with me.

[mtutiger]

6 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I did read it, and I don't think stating regime change when he's in a border country of Russia, or if he did it from the Oval office really makes any difference, nor does the audience.  It should not have been publicly stated anywhere, to any audience, period.  His own administration appears to agree with me.

Again, my only point is that the speech was aimed for an Eastern European audience. Especially given the location. And that how certain phrases were recieved here may have been  recieved different elsewhere. Go look at Thomas Ilves twitter feed (ie. Former President of Estonia) if you don't believe me.

I was not commenting on whether it was the right thing to say or not. 

Edited March 28, 2022 by mtutiger

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, ewsieg said:

I did read it, and I don't think stating regime change when he's in a border country of Russia, or if he did it from the Oval office really makes any difference, nor does the audience.  It should not have been publicly stated anywhere, to any audience, period.  His own administration appears to agree with me.

Of course as Trump so well perfected, you can say something deliberately to make a point with one audience, and then backfill to smooth the ruffles with another. Or Biden may have spoken with full intent knowing his 'people' were going to disagree and backfill as needed. I doubt there are many scenarios you can dream up that haven't been gamed out by media analysts so trying to guess what was 'on purpose', accidental, or 'accidental on purpose' is probably a futile exercise.

[mtutiger]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Of course as Trump so well perfected, you can say something deliberately to make a point with one audience, and then backfill to smooth the ruffles with another. 

Whether this was the intent or not, it's almost exactly how it has played out.

[ewsieg]

10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Of course as Trump so well perfected, you can say something deliberately to make a point with one audience, and then backfill to smooth the ruffles with another. Or Biden may have spoken with full intent knowing his 'people' were going to disagree and backfill as needed. I doubt there are many scenarios you can dream up that haven't been gamed out by media analysts so trying to guess what was 'on purpose', accidental, or 'accidental on purpose' is probably a futile exercise.

Wait, so with a straight face you're trying to tell me Biden may have purposefully said it, because he knew he'd get a great reaction from it and then had it planned for his administration to walk it back in regions that he knew where it would be a problem?

And in that scenario, you're cool with it?

[gehringer_2]

35 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Wait, so with a straight face you're trying to tell me Biden may have purposefully said it, because he knew he'd get a great reaction from it and then had it planned for his administration to walk it back in regions that he knew where it would be a problem?

And in that scenario, you're cool with it?

It wasn't a gaffe in the sense of having misspoken - he said exactly what he meant to say. The question you really want to know the answer to is whether he was 'off script', but that's always an odd question to ask about a President because it's his script. Reagan was 'off-script' with Gorbachev as well. The consultant class around an executive like to promulgate the idea that they 'manage' their target, but that's a self-serving mirror image representation. It's presidents who allow their handlers too much veto power (Jimmy Carter a good example) who often fail because of it - it's usually their authentic instincts that made them successful in the first place. You know I've posted already that I think personalizing things with Putin may be questionable strategy so I'm not arguing I think it was any kind of great move - simply the idea that these guys don't spend a lot of time not knowing what they are doing. In that moment Biden made a calculation that he wanted to say that enough that it would be worth whatever message massaging would come later. He's the guy that got the votes and that gives him the right to do that. How far in advance it was or wasn't planned or whether he circulated a memo to his staff about it isn't that interesting to me.  And that's the parallel to Trump.

And really, isn't kind of silly to ask whether 'regime change' is the 'officlal' policy of the US gov when we are leading a huge international effort to produce a major battlefield defeat of a leader that almost certainly cannot survive it? Pretty hard to imagine what more the US could be doing to crush Putin personally by making the policy 'official'.

Edited March 28, 2022 by gehringer_2

[romad1]

Where do things end with Vlad?

 

[mtutiger]

As I was saying. 

[chasfh]

Biden merely said what everyone is already thinking. Just because he said it out loud doesn’t commit US to lead the mission to remove Putin from power.

In fact, it can’t be US because then we become the big bad guy everyone casts a wary eye on. We have a recent history of effecting regime change, sometimes against the will of the people (Exhibit A: Iran, 1953), so other countries would understandably be suspicious of just what we intend to accomplish after. The last thing people want is to see the bully providing actual protection for everyone else, because the price of that kind of peace is generally higher than people want to pay. And make no mistake, the rest of the world generally regards America as the world’s bully. (We ourselves might have a different view of that.)

It feels like Biden’s might have been a message to anyone who might have anything to do with actually removing Putin from power. If that’s not going to be Seal Team Six storming the Kremlin to frog march him out—again, because we can’t be seen doing that—then who are we talking about? The Russian people at large? The oligarchs who have occasional access? Inner circle elements who have continual access? Fifth column elements within the FSB or Putin’s personal protection unit? I’m not sure who else could effectively remove him.

[pfife]

9 hours ago, ewsieg said:

Umm, Joe Biden did.  What am I missing here?

He didn't say it was the US policy.  Quite clearly did not say it.   

[pfife]

33 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Biden merely said what everyone is already thinking. Just because he said it out loud doesn’t commit US to lead the mission to remove Putin from power.

Exactly right.   Unless you pretend he said something he clearly didn't say.

If I say "this car needs new tires" that hardly means it's my policy to change its tires.

[oblong]

"Jeff Blashill can't remain the coach of the Red Wings" - fans of the Detroit Red wings <> Fans will remove Blashill as coach of the Red Wings

[The Ronz]

I guess we bombed Russia. The President even said so.

 

[ewsieg]

Quote

“For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden said.

I went back to review Biden's comment again and I apologize.  I, stupidly, took this to mean Putin cannot remain in power.  My incredible hatred for Biden forced my mind to insert 'regime change'.  How stupid of me.  I just reviewed the entire transcript of his speech, is 'this man' even Putin?  He references Pope John Paul right towards the end, so maybe it was just a history lesson about how Pope John Paul was unable to remain in power (due to being dead).

Plus, even if it is Putin, I can now see so many different things he could be saying.  For 1), the end of his speech indicates the US will back democracies in eastern Europe with no limit.  He very well could just be pointing out that we're willing to outlast Russia and we're prepared for a proxy war in Ukraine until Putin dies of natural causes.  Putin is only 69, so I mean, potentially only a 15-20 year proxy war.

Folks, seriously.  It was not scripted, it was a mistake that even Biden's administration admitted.  It was not part of some crazy strategic matter.  No, you can't 'but Reagan' this pointing out 'evil empire', the relational strain was not near the level it is right now and Biden already matched Reagan earlier with his monster/butcher comments, this was an escalation of that rhetoric and I guarantee this was on Russian state TV, right with something Tucker said, to 'prove' the West really is after Russia.  Your side can make a mistake without it being the end all/be all.  It's not like you have to thrown away your Dem cards and vote for Trump in the next election just because you admit a mistake happened.

[pfife]

I reviewed his actual words and he said nothing about the US removing putin from power.

Looks like ewsieg making up shit Biden said too just like he does to posters in this board.  

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I went back to review Biden's comment again and I apologize.  I, stupidly, took this to mean Putin cannot remain in power.  My incredible hatred for Biden forced my mind to insert 'regime change'.  How stupid of me.  I just reviewed the entire transcript of his speech, is 'this man' even Putin?  He references Pope John Paul right towards the end, so maybe it was just a history lesson about how Pope John Paul was unable to remain in power (due to being dead).

Plus, even if it is Putin, I can now see so many different things he could be saying.  For 1), the end of his speech indicates the US will back democracies in eastern Europe with no limit.  He very well could just be pointing out that we're willing to outlast Russia and we're prepared for a proxy war in Ukraine until Putin dies of natural causes.  Putin is only 69, so I mean, potentially only a 15-20 year proxy war.

Folks, seriously.  It was not scripted, it was a mistake that even Biden's administration admitted.  It was not part of some crazy strategic matter.  No, you can't 'but Reagan' this pointing out 'evil empire', the relational strain was not near the level it is right now and Biden already matched Reagan earlier with his monster/butcher comments, this was an escalation of that rhetoric and I guarantee this was on Russian state TV, right with something Tucker said, to 'prove' the West really is after Russia.  Your side can make a mistake without it being the end all/be all.  It's not like you have to thrown away your Dem cards and vote for Trump in the next election just because you admit a mistake happened.

OK, let's grant your point for a minute that Biden made a mistake, his staff tried to walk it back, and he shouldn't have said it.

So what happens now? The remark is still sitting out there with the rest of the world. How do we fix this, in your view?

[oblong]

I love how the anti Dem talking points all revolve around things that are made up.... 

 

[gehringer_2]

just for grins, if Merkel had said this out loud about Trump, what do we think the reactions from various quarters would be? Probably along the same lines as we have now? In Europe: "Of course!",  the GOP: "c'est Terrible!", Dems: "Another person roasted for telling the truth by accident" and so on....

...The difference would be that unlike the NYT and WaPO, Die Welt would all be: "You go girl!"

.

Edited March 28, 2022 by gehringer_2

[ewsieg]

 

Quote

5 minutes ago, chasfh said:

OK, let's grant your point for a minute that Biden made a mistake, his staff tried to walk it back, and he shouldn't have said it.

So what happens now? The remark is still sitting out there with the rest of the world. How do we fix this, in your view?

From an earlier post of mine regarding this:

Quote

Biden made a mistake, it's not the end of the world.  His own administration is admitting it was a mistake based on their actions afterwards.  In the end, I just trust the folks Biden has assembled to be able to handle a speech gaffe and not allow it to modify policy.  Within a day or two, it'll blow over.

Biden's admin has already handled it.  As you say, it's already out there, can't put the genie back in the bottle, but I'm not pretending this is the end all / be all moment that potentially could start WWIII either.  

[gehringer_2]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

just for grins, if Merkel had said this out loud about Trump, what do we think the reactions from various quarters would be? Probably along the same lines as we have now? In Europe: "Of course!",  the GOP: "c'est Terrible!", Dems: "Another person roasted for telling the truth by accident" and so on....

...The difference would be that unlike the NYT and WaPO, Die Welt would all be: "You go girl!"

.

and just to expand on the last point, it's actually wonderful that the US is self-critical, the only issue I have is that too often we are self-critical about silly things "The President told the truth! Reactions at 11:00" and not critical enough about important things - for instance the way so much of the US journalism fell in behind the invasion of Iraq. ( or even 'Gulf of Tonkin' in its day FTM )

Edited March 28, 2022 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

 

From an earlier post of mine regarding this:

Biden's admin has already handled it.  As you say, it's already out there, can't put the genie back in the bottle, but I'm not pretending this is the end all / be all moment that potentially could start WWIII either.  

OK. I would counter that if this statement were an actual problem, US would be working hard to fix it and mollify the offended parties. If they're not doing that, they must not think it's much of a problem.