Biden “Gravitas”

So, I watched parts of Joe Biden’s acceptance speech.  I found at least two instances where he has contradicted himself from previous statements, some made only a year back.

If you want me to offer my assessment of Biden’s contribution to Barak Hussien Obama’s candidacy: he’s a zit waiting to be popped.  It’s pretty obvious to me that he’s swallowing the Obama policy on things, which is just opening him up for attacks from the McCain camp.

Here’s the first example from his acceptance speech:

I’ve been on the ground in Georgia, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and I can tell you in no uncertain terms: This administration’s policy has been an abysmal failure.

From Joe Biden’s appearance on Meet The Press, April 19, 2007:

The threat [Saddam Hussein] presented was that, if Saddam was left unfettered, which I said during that period, for the next five years with sanctions lifted and billions of dollars into his coffers, then I believed he had the ability to acquire a tactical nuclear weapon — not by building it, by purchasing it. I also believed he was a threat in that he was — every single solitary U.N. resolution which he agreed to abide by, which was the equivalent of a peace agreement at the United Nations, after he got out of — after we kicked him out of Kuwait, he was violating. Now, the rules of the road either mean something or they don’t. The international community says “We’re going to enforce the sanctions we placed” or not. And what was the international community doing? The international community was weakening. They were pulling away.

Call me crazy, but that sounds like Joe Biden agreeing with the “abysmal” policy of the present administration.

As far as the Georgia invasion, I refer you to his comments after he returned from his trip there:

During my time in Georgia, I surveyed the human and geopolitical consequences of the conflict there firsthand. I visited a facility where some of the tens of thousands of Georgians who have fled the fighting are seeking refuge, unsure about whether they will ever return to their homes. On the tarmac of Tbilisi’s airport, I consulted with the dedicated US Air Force personnel who are bringing urgently needed humanitarian assistance to the region. I spent many hours in talks with Georgia’s President, Prime Minister, Parliamentary Speaker, and other national leaders discussing how Georgia and the West should respond to this crisis. And I conferred extensively with U.S. Ambassador to Georgia John Tefft and, via phone, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about how the United States should meet this challenge.

I left the country convinced that Russia’s invasion of Georgia may be the one of the most significant event to occur in Europe since the end of communism. The claims of Georgian atrocities that provided the pretext for Russia’s invasion are rapidly being disproved by international observers, and the continuing presence of Russian forces in the country has severe implications for the broader region. The war that began in Georgia is no longer about that country alone. It has become a question of whether and how the West will stand up for the rights of free people throughout the region. The outcome there will determine whether we realize the grand ambition of a Europe that is whole, free, and at peace.

Russia must make good on President Medvedev’s commitment to immediately withdraw Russian troops to their positions before the current fighting began. We also need a truly independent and international peacekeeping force in Georgia’s conflict regions. And we must help the people of Georgia to rebuild their country and preserve its democratic institutions.

When Congress reconvenes, I intend to work with the Administration to seek Congressional approval for $1 billion in emergency assistance for Georgia, with a substantial down payment on that aid to be included in the Congress’ next supplemental spending bill. This money will help the people of Georgia recover from the damage that has been inflicted on their economy and send a clear message that the United States will not abandon this young democracy. I hope this $1 billion commitment will be matched by others in the international community.

I have long sought to help Russia realize its extraordinary potential as a force for progress in the international community, and have supported legislative efforts intended to forge a more constructive relationship with the Kremlin. But Russia’s actions in Georgia will have consequences.

Russia’s actions havealready erased the possibility of advancing legislative efforts to promote U.S.-Russian partnership in the current Congress, including an agreement to allow for increased collaboration with Russia on nuclear energy production and the repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which currently blocks the country’s integration into the World Trade Organization. Russia’s failure to keep its word and withdraw troops from Georgia risks the country’s standing as part of the international community. That is not the future the United States or Europe want – but it is the future Russia may get if it does not stand down its forces and live up to its commitments.

His suggestions?  Work with Bush.  Outside of that?  Prevent them from entering the WTO (which they’re not in already), and and no longer collaborate with them on creating nuclear power plants (which they know how to do already…remember Chernobyl?).  Yeah, THAT’LL get them to back off!

Oh yeah, and work with Bush to send a billion dollars to a country that might not exist by the time Congress reconvenes…thank you Nancy Pelosi.

What did Bush do?  Got NATO involved, upgraded Georgia’s NATO status, got the UN involved, and sealed a missile defense deal with Poland, which made the Russians howl.  This resulted in a cease-fire agreement, which got the Russians to stop the attacks.  Yes.  Clearly an “abysmal failure”.

I also might point out that what Bush is presently doing with getting the “international community” involved – The UN, NATO, and countries like France – is what the Democrats complained he WASN’T doing in regards to Iraq.  So, here now Bush had the “international community” engaged (and even specifically pointed out that this is really an issue between Europe and Russia), and Democrats like Biden and Obama are claiming that he’s doing the wrong thing.

Sometimes, you need a score card to figure out what in the hell the Democrats want in the first place.  I mean, outside of a reason to criticize Bush in order to gain political advantage, which is what is going on here. 

What’s Obama’s solution?  I checked, and the best I could find is this:

“I condemn Russia’s decision to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states and call upon all countries of the world not to accord any legitimacy to this action.
“The United States should call for a meeting of the United Nations Security Council to condemn Russia’s decision in coordination with our European allies. The U.S. should lead within the UN and other international forums to cast a clear and unrelenting light on the decision, and to further isolate Russia internationally because of its actions. The OSCE must also send a serious monitoring group to Georgia.

“Georgia’s economic recovery is an urgent strategic priority that demands the focused attention of the United States and our allies. That is why Senator Biden and I have called for $1 billion in reconstruction assistance to help the people of Georgia in this time of great trial. I also welcome NATO’s decision to establish a NATO-Georgia Commission and applaud the new French and German initiatives to continue work on these issues within the EU. The Bush Administration should call for a US-EU-Georgia summit in September that focuses on strategies for preserving Georgia’s territorial integrity and advancing its economic recovery.

“Russia’s government must respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia and other independent states. Its refusal to do so calls into question its commitment to the responsibilities of membership to organizations such as the OCSE and the Russia-NATO Council, its application to join the WTO and the OECD, and makes it impossible for Congress to enact the civil nuclear agreement. If Russia’s government continues to violate the norms and practices of the international community, the United States and our allies must review all aspects of relations with Russia.

“Let us be clear, no one wants to see another Cold War with Russia. The United States and Russia havemany mutual interests, and Russia has the potential to become a criticalstakeholder in the international system. But Russia’s recent choices –not American or European decisions — are threatening this potential and reminding us all that peace and security in Europe cannot be taken for granted,” said Senator Barack Obama.

In essence, he’s calling for things Bush has already done, or is doing.

Wow!  What a killer of a solution!

Of course, going to the UN is kind of pointless as RUSSIA HAS VETO POWER.  And I’m sure preventing them from getting into the WTO will really put the screws to them, all right!  That’ll make them howl!

When was the last time the UN had a situation like this, and needed to act?  Well, from 1991 to 2003, Iraq was the sore spot in the world.  What did the UN Security Council do?  Passed twelve resolutions over the course of some twelve years, which ended with the the UN weapons inspectors getting kicked out of Iraq.  It wasn’t until the US “unilaterally” invaded (with its allies) that we finally resolved this problem once and for all.

Yeah.  Going to the UN is a real effective strategy.  Make no mistake about it: Biden, Obama, et al have not even the slightest clue what to do in this situation.  They have literally nothing to use as leverage against Russia that isn’t already being done by the present administration.

This Biden quote, however, is probably the better of the two.

Should we trust John McCain’s judgment when he says we can’t have no timelines to draw down our troops from Iraq, that we must stay indefinitely? Or should we listen to Barack Obama, who says shift the responsibility to the Iraqis and set a time to bring our combat troops home?

Now, after six long years, the administration and the Iraqi government are on the verge of setting a date to bring our troops home. John McCain was wrong, and Barack Obama was right.

Joe Biden, September 13, 2007 on the campaign trail:

My impression is [Obama] thinks that if we leave, somehow the Iraqis are going to have an epiphany” of peaceful coexistence among warring sects. “I’ve seen zero evidence of that.

Joe Biden on October, 2002 in the run-up to the Iraq War:

We must be clear with the American people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the day after, but the decade after.

Joe Biden to the Brookings Institution, 2005:

We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq. I think that would be a gigantic mistake. Or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out — equally a mistake.

Furthermore, it wasn’t the Bush administration nor John McCain requesting a timeline for withdrawls: it was the Iraqi government.  Joe Biden knows this.  Obama has said (before changing his position several times) that HE would set a specific timeline for the withdrawl of troops, not the Iraqis.

I guess Biden kind of “overlooked” that little difference.

Not much of a surprise there.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: