Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Starver]

Since you're accusing me of doing to you what you are in fact doing to me, you must be a Democrat.

That's actually very funny meta-humour, given who the people who accused people of doing what they were doing actually were. Are we going into "I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?" territory?

Only replying so that those who have you on ignore can share in the joke.


That aside:

As I nearly have said on the not-WW3 thread, I don't think it's a coincidence that Putin waited until Angela Merkel stepped aside. What you really need is someone like her as leader. Solid, has a lot of person experience with east-of-the-iron-wall psychology and probably even would have support of many in the religious sphere (which seems to matter far more than it should do, compared to everything else a President has to deal with).

You don't have her (or anyone obviously like her) as an available candidate, the birthright thing getting in the way of it actually ever being her (should she even be willing). Right now you don't need warhawk or chickenhawk but someone with presence and conviction. I think Biden could do it, as the one who needs to, but he needs to put more effort into it.

Unfortunately, there seemed no real opportunity to move from Trump's brand of so-called-presidency into even the better-subset of Reaganesque reaction to the (not yet so palpable) Russian threat. Even though we now know he was failing and ailing, he had his filmstar experience behind him (for which reality-star experience was a poor substitute, especially when otherwise so handicapped). What the American public got as a choice, those not still suckered by the previous sucker, was the safe not-Trump option. And because Hillary was besmirched (as much wrongly as for any really good reasons) she was excluded - although if she had not been shut out, and was currently in power, I'm wondering if she'd have been a better option for today's main issue. Or even have precluded it, somehow.

Harris might well turn out to be competent, but is untested and too fresh a face, IMO. Better than a Dan Quail, probably, but not yet H.W. Bush level of potentially ascendent VP. Again, her selection was to a different philosophy than what is needed right now. The world changes like that, as we know.


I obviously have a limited view of the current field of potential presidential material, though maybe I've already heard of whoever comes next. The ones jockeying for power, or the ones already in line of succession in case of a series of unfortunate accidents, might contain amongst them the "President you need right now" (going with the assumption that Biden is insufficiently that).

But my parallel-universe-viewer is broken at the moment. Its spare parts are currently sitting in the one where New Zealand dominates the global football scene. All forms of football.

[scriver]

As I nearly have said on the not-WW3 thread, I don't think it's a coincidence that Putin waited until Angela Merkel stepped aside. What you really need is someone like her as leader. Solid, has a lot of person experience with east-of-the-iron-wall psychology and probably even would have support of many in the religious sphere (which seems to matter far more than it should do, compared to everything else a President has to deal with).

You don't have her (or anyone obviously like her) as an available candidate, the birthright thing getting in the way of it actually ever being her (should she even be willing). Right now you don't need warhawk or chickenhawk but someone with presence and conviction. I think Biden could do it, as the one who needs to, but he needs to put more effort into it.

I'm not sure what kind of person you think Merkel was.

[Andux]

The US President Biden is SENILE.
Seriously, watch Biden's speeches.  He is reading a fucking script, he can't answer questions.  Compare how he sounds to how everyone else in the US Government sounds.

For fuck's sake.

Biden has a goddamn stutter; he's been dealing with that shit since childhood. He might be an idiot politically, but he's not senile.

[None]

oh no, his speech is scripted

he's totally lost it

it's too bad we don't have a president with hard-hitting, poignant, candid, off-the-cuff speeches about the nuclear in iran and uncle's very good genes or about cleaning the lungs or someone with the foresight and panache to divert a tropical storm with a sharpie

biden won't even send tanks to the mexico border smh

[Starver]

I'm not sure what kind of person you think Merkel was.

A good example. You know, an ex research-scientist who was also a christian who grew up in East Germany but definitely is western-facing and went on to lead a major country, at times the G7, also a major European figure. Resisted both Putin and Trump, etc. She promoted renewables[1], handled repurcussions of the global debt crisis and showed compassion[2] but with a firm hand.

Not to wish to make this a hagiography, and perhaps it was just coincidence that this happens mere months after she retired from the helm (which would have been my point if I'd posted the post, to the other thread, that I at one point was tempted to). But it was mostly my segue into the discussion of whether Biden/Trump/other was the right POTUS for the current moment. I think, ignoring illegibility and other technical reasons, you could do far worse. I mean, Boris Johnson isn't totally ruled out... Just needs some residency time under his hat and then he could conceivably try for it.


[1] Debatable whether the move away from nuclear was as fortunate
[2] To a fault, you might argue.

[scriver]

She was the person that caused the majority of the European side of the crisis, or at the least Germany did (partially under her leadership), and she certainly did not handle it with any kind compassion for her victims. Her stance in international politics has always been Germany First, and if she was still in charge today her stance would have been exactly the same as we get from Germany now, except likely a harder stress on the "no weapons sold from Germany can be given to Ukraine". As for "she handled Trump and Putin" ("handled Trump" lol what handling do you even think that buffoon needed) she was the one who has seen German become so dependant on Russian gas as it is, and has been the main proponent of the Nordstream projects (Nordstream 1 was agreed to before her and only overseen by her, but 2 was hers) in the face of constant worry over how it benefited Russia from the entire rest of the EU.

Angela Merkel ain't worth the cheap plaster pedestal people put her on.

[Lord Shonus]

Biden prepared for this crisis - which he's been predicting for almost twenty years - by pulling out of Afghanistan for the explicit and stated purpose of focusing on the Real Threat of Russia and China. He has pre-emptively deployed additional forces to NATO countries and aggressively helped convince nations under the Russian and Chinese threat to purchase and train with the most advanced weapons systems available. Under his direction, the US government has publicized this Russian buildup and their war plans (revealing US capabilities in this area to a degree that isn't usually desirable) and has been proven completely correct. For this, he has been labeled a warmonger and accused of manufacturing a crisis to create a "replacement war" for political gain.

Once the invasion started, he immediately pushed for draconian sanctions and every measure to punish Putin short of war. The only thing keeping those sanctions from being absolute has been stiff resistance from Italy and Germany (continuing Merkel's proud tradition of "don't you dare anger Russia, I want that cheap gas" policies).


Quite literally, if he had been any more aggressive in response to this crisis, American bombers would now be striking targets in Russia. There is nothing less that can be done that Biden has not already done.

[Starver]

She was the person that caused the majority of the European side of the crisis,

Which crisis are you talking about? Because I feel we're talking cross-purposes here.

Not sure what pedestal you think I'm using, I was just responding to your unexplained negative attitude. As with the curate's egg, I claim nothing but that any politician can be "good in parts", and all too many of them sparse in that regard. I have no love for Margaret Thatcher, but her fall from grace in ignominity only came after a long time in power where she did hold her end, quite convincingly, against 'enemies' both domestic and foreign. She was openly toppled from power.


As to Biden, I suspect that mechanically he has done a lot more behind the scenes than we'll ever know. But I really expect more of him on the public stage. Ironic when it was entirely the opposite for the guy who filled in between Obahama and him.

[Lord Shonus]

She was the person that caused the majority of the European side of the crisis,

Which crisis are you talking about? Because I feel we're talking cross-purposes here.

Merkel's policies went a long way toward bringing Germany into energy dependence on Russia, and Russia has repeatedly used that as a club to prevent organized action against Russian encroachments. Her policies are also a large reason why top Germany military officials are issuing "don't expect much from us, we don't really have an army anymore" statements. The toothlessness of the German military and Germany's tendency in recent years to lie down and whimper whenever Russia starts shouting are big reasons why Putin thinks he can get away with this.

[scriver]

She was the person that caused the majority of the European side of the crisis,

Which crisis are you talking about? Because I feel we're talking cross-purposes here.

2008. When Germany nearly drove half of Europe into bankruptcy.

[Cyroth]

Her policies are also a large reason why top Germany military officials are issuing "don't expect much from us, we don't really have an army anymore" statements. The toothlessness of the German military and Germany's tendency in recent years to lie down and whimper whenever Russia starts shouting are big reasons why Putin thinks he can get away with this.

That is a very real thing. I think I've shared my uncles (who was a drill instructor in the Bundeswehr from about 95-2010) favorite story before, that after 2005~ish they had to do live fire drills in the, as he calls it "soviet style", because they had more recruits then actually working rifles. And this was after conscription stopped, so it isn't like they had huge masses of recruits to supply in the first place.

There was also that scandal a few (6 or so) years back then it turned out only about a quarter of our combat vehicles are actually funtional (even less for the navy), with about half stuck in shops with huge waiting lists for spare parts and the remainder in such a bad condition they'd probably break if you tried to move them.

I have not payed much attention to any of this in the last half decade, but knowing my government I'm willing to bet that realistically Germany does not have a functional standing army at the moment.

[Starver]

She was the person that caused the majority of the European side of the crisis,

Which crisis are you talking about? Because I feel we're talking cross-purposes here.

2008. When Germany nearly drove half of Europe into bankruptcy.

Oh, I see. Different crisis from the one I thought you were complaining about. But there were several other options I thought you were complaining about.

Like I said, not infallible, but steadfast when feeling properly justified. In this case it was the time when the whole world was basically caught up in event-horizon of the same financial black hole, and the weakness (or incompetence) of certain EU nations' own central finances became impossible to cover up clearly has nothing to do with it. Of the various options the EU could have persued (including chucking whole countries out of the EU and telling them to re-apply only when they could provide balance-sheets that once again justified membership), what would you have suggested instead? It's not like the wrong decision could destabilise the whole region, including the more financially resilient member-nations, right?


And, LS, I touched on my thoughts about that with the post-Fukushima denuclearisation process being not to my personal liking. Though Germany also went very heavily into renewables (ahead of the curve) in a way that mitigated what could have been the even fuller reliance upon Russian gas.

And remember that Germany has a more than a hint of memory of when it over-reaches in its ambitions. Given that, I understand somewhat it's reluctance to pick up arms, even against provocations. Look at Japan and certain of its near neighbours.


I think my intended points were missed, though. I was groping in the dark for some US presidential material that had gravitas without being full of hot air, was decisive without being reckless, capable of being subtle without so much being ineffectual, experienced without being world-weary, a face that works for the people without being barefaced/brassnecked populist. I mentioned Merkel along the way (because I'd had an inkling to mention how Putin seems to have awaited her departure), before firmly moving into the americocentric question of who (in America) would be the best statesperson to handle this current crisis. I very nearly mentioned Schwarzenegger!

Anyway, I had no wish to bandy legs with anyone on this. It was mere comment and armchair musing, so to provoke such violent and unannotated disagreement surprised me.

[Lord Shonus]

gravitas without being full of hot air, was decisive without being reckless, capable of being subtle without so much being ineffectual, experienced without being world-weary, a face that works for the people without being barefaced/brassnecked populist.

You are quite literally describing Joseph Robinette Biden. A lot of the attacks on him are for precisely these qualities.

[Starver]

I might be tempted to agree with you, in general, except that I've not really seen/heard his performance in this crisis[1]. And while I appreciate that a significant proportion of the US wouldn't urinate on him if he was on fire and would dispute any of those positive points on shear principle, I've been left feeling even those favorable to him have found him lacking... so I was considering it in light of the calls for Harris to take charge. (Which would be pemature.). And I posted a handy link to the line of succession, in case anyone was bothered.


[1] But then we've not had many reports on the UN response, either. Seem to be under-reported, despite in arguably the organisation that has direct overview, not just neighbourly self-interest.

[scriver]

She was the person that caused the majority of the European side of the crisis,

Which crisis are you talking about? Because I feel we're talking cross-purposes here.

2008. When Germany nearly drove half of Europe into bankruptcy.

Oh, I see. Different crisis from the one I thought you were complaining about. But there were several other options I thought you were complaining about.

Like I said, not infallible, but steadfast when feeling properly justified. In this case it was the time when the whole world was basically caught up in event-horizon of the same financial black hole, and the weakness (or incompetence) of certain EU nations' own central finances became impossible to cover up clearly has nothing to do with it. Of the various options the EU could have persued (including chucking whole countries out of the EU and telling them to re-apply only when they could provide balance-sheets that once again justified membership), what would you have suggested instead? It's not like the wrong decision could destabilise the whole region, including the more financially resilient member-nations, right?

I would suggest she had kept to the signed agreement to not drive other Euro-using countries bankrupt with German interest rates in the first case. The one Germany signed because other countries was afraid the exact thing that happened in 2008 would happen unless Germany limited their interest rates. Signed, and then never actually followed, which is what caused said economic collapse of several euro countries, as they had been afraid would happen. Yeah, I would basically suggest not undermining the whole region to begin with. That's a good way to combat destabilisation.