[cardcrimson]

Support for Ukraine is terrific.  At the same time NATO and the US primary goal has to be to avoid escalation.  Biden doesn’t help things by exclaiming that Putin “cannot remain in power”, at the same time Macron is holding talks with Putin.  

I get that the comment may help him domestically.   But Americans seem to be oblivious to the consequences.  There is no other explanation for Americans supporting a “no-fly” zone.  Biden certainly isn’t, or shouldn’t be, oblivious.  Idiotic comment, notwithstanding. (Apparently, the Ambassador had to clean things up, assuring that we have no “regime change” policy.)

Does Putin smoke cigars…..

I watched Biden's speech in Poland in its entirety. My assumption was it would be a historic event that most people alive today will not appreciate in terms of its significance. The speech hit on so many points. It communicated so much, both on the range of topics covered, audiences spoken to, and tone used. Biden isn't a great orator, but the substance and meaning of the words he spoke were voluminous.

Now, let me address the hysteria over "this man must go," and provide the proper context for it.

First of all, the entire speech was themed around democracies standing up against autocracies, that we cannot let autocracies cow democracies - or freedom loving people - with threats and aggression. 

Second, Biden said our goal (NATO/EU) is to reduce Russia's economy by 50%. This doesn't happen overnight and betrays a long term commitment to making Russia a pariah on the world stage. Part of this is moving off Russian oil/gas and to renewable energy.

Third, Biden was speaking to the Russian people when he said Putin can't remain in power. He wasn't speaking to Americans or NATO for that matter. He was effectively saying "if you Russian people want sanctions to end, force Putin out." The "regime change" hysteria is based on a number of assumptions and reading a lot into what Biden said, not on what he actually said in context.

Fourth, Biden closed his speech saying "this man can't remain in power" before saying "may god bless, etc." So he meant what he said. That wasn't "we will remove him." It was a generic statement that he can't remain, while speaking to the Russian people.

I felt strongly that as soon as the Ukraine invasion started, the only way democracies would take their foot off Russia's economic neck would be after Putin is gone from Russia. We have had it with him. That's the message Biden was sending, and I LOVED IT.

Putin is going to do what he is going to do. He lies about everything as it is (like Nazis in Ukraine government), so nothing any adversary says at this point is going to influence his behavior. He has his own calculations, risks, and rewards to weigh. But we control how we engage with Russia. In March of 2022 and foreseeable future, that is not at all until the Russian people rise up and make a change. It had to be said and the leader of the free world said it.

Out of curiosity, how would one respond to blatantly biased political commentary such as the above and not violate the board rules?

FIFY: How can I respond with blatant political commentary to a post that accurately summarized a speech given about the most delicate and important issue of our time, by someone I don't like?

The answer is you can't.

Huh?

[cardcrimson]

Support for Ukraine is terrific.  At the same time NATO and the US primary goal has to be to avoid escalation.  Biden doesn’t help things by exclaiming that Putin “cannot remain in power”, at the same time Macron is holding talks with Putin.  

I get that the comment may help him domestically.   But Americans seem to be oblivious to the consequences.  There is no other explanation for Americans supporting a “no-fly” zone.  Biden certainly isn’t, or shouldn’t be, oblivious.  Idiotic comment, notwithstanding. (Apparently, the Ambassador had to clean things up, assuring that we have no “regime change” policy.)

Does Putin smoke cigars…..

I watched Biden's speech in Poland in its entirety. My assumption was it would be a historic event that most people alive today will not appreciate in terms of its significance. The speech hit on so many points. It communicated so much, both on the range of topics covered, audiences spoken to, and tone used. Biden isn't a great orator, but the substance and meaning of the words he spoke were voluminous.

Now, let me address the hysteria over "this man must go," and provide the proper context for it.

First of all, the entire speech was themed around democracies standing up against autocracies, that we cannot let autocracies cow democracies - or freedom loving people - with threats and aggression. 

Second, Biden said our goal (NATO/EU) is to reduce Russia's economy by 50%. This doesn't happen overnight and betrays a long term commitment to making Russia a pariah on the world stage. Part of this is moving off Russian oil/gas and to renewable energy.

Third, Biden was speaking to the Russian people when he said Putin can't remain in power. He wasn't speaking to Americans or NATO for that matter. He was effectively saying "if you Russian people want sanctions to end, force Putin out." The "regime change" hysteria is based on a number of assumptions and reading a lot into what Biden said, not on what he actually said in context.

Fourth, Biden closed his speech saying "this man can't remain in power" before saying "may god bless, etc." So he meant what he said. That wasn't "we will remove him." It was a generic statement that he can't remain, while speaking to the Russian people.

I felt strongly that as soon as the Ukraine invasion started, the only way democracies would take their foot off Russia's economic neck would be after Putin is gone from Russia. We have had it with him. That's the message Biden was sending, and I LOVED IT.

Putin is going to do what he is going to do. He lies about everything as it is (like Nazis in Ukraine government), so nothing any adversary says at this point is going to influence his behavior. He has his own calculations, risks, and rewards to weigh. But we control how we engage with Russia. In March of 2022 and foreseeable future, that is not at all until the Russian people rise up and make a change. It had to be said and the leader of the free world said it.

Out of curiosity, how would one respond to blatantly biased political commentary such as the above and not violate the board rules?

FIFY: How can I respond with blatant political commentary to a post that accurately summarized a speech given about the most delicate and important issue of our time, by someone I don't like?

The answer is you can't.

Huh?