The Biden Administration Thread

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Nov 6, 2010
3,439
1,207
1,743
And before he took the next piss, the WH mop crew walked it back………………..
This one actually has me wondering. Was it your garden variety Biden gaffe, or was it more choreographed? If strategic ambiguity on steroids is your goal, having a gaffe prone senile president "accidentally" telegraph a new policy could be considered a brilliant maneuver.
 
Jul 5, 2020
1,899
381
213
59
Broken Arrow
This one actually has me wondering. Was it your garden variety Biden gaffe, or was it more choreographed? If strategic ambiguity on steroids is your goal, having a gaffe prone senile president "accidentally" telegraph a new policy could be considered a brilliant maneuver.
It was a clear case of Biden simply opening his mouth without first giving a reasonable thought to what he was about to say.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
54,631
18,192
1,743
This one actually has me wondering. Was it your garden variety Biden gaffe, or was it more choreographed? If strategic ambiguity on steroids is your goal, having a gaffe prone senile president "accidentally" telegraph a new policy could be considered a brilliant maneuver.
What new policy?

See the Taiwan Relations Act (1979).

And, China Joe, brilliant? lol
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
19,916
21,090
1,743
This one actually has me wondering. Was it your garden variety Biden gaffe, or was it more choreographed? If strategic ambiguity on steroids is your goal, having a gaffe prone senile president "accidentally" telegraph a new policy could be considered a brilliant maneuver.
When Trump went off the rails publicly, Trumpets called it "4D chess".

In both situations, I think it was probably the same thing....a President that's not actually "all there".
 
Nov 6, 2010
3,439
1,207
1,743
Given their repeating a policy that is 43 years old it's hardly brilliant on their part.
Nowhere in that official policy is it stated the the US would intervene militarily, at least not that I could fine. Otherwise, this wouldn't be a big deal. Having said that, I tend to think this was probably just Biden being Biden, but it's worth consideration I think that it could have been planned.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
54,631
18,192
1,743
Nowhere in that official policy is it stated the the US would intervene militarily, at least not that I could fine. Otherwise, this wouldn't be a big deal. Having said that, I tend to think this was probably just Biden being Biden, but it's worth consideration I think that it could have been planned.
  • to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and
  • to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan
 
Nov 6, 2010
3,439
1,207
1,743
  • to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and
  • to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan
Yea, I read that, Biden's comment went way further. Thus, the stink.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
54,631
18,192
1,743
Yea, I read that, Biden's comment went way further. Thus, the stink.
Then why did you say "Nowhere in that official policy is it stated the the US would intervene militarily" when that is clearly military intervention.
 
Nov 6, 2010
3,439
1,207
1,743
Then why did you say "Nowhere in that official policy is it stated the the US would intervene militarily" when that is clearly military intervention.
Clearly, I don't define the word clearly the same as you. And evidently, no one else does either, thus the consensus description of our policy as "strategic ambiguity.
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
19,916
21,090
1,743
Clearly, I don't define the word clearly the same as you. And evidently, no one else does either, thus the consensus description of our policy as "strategic ambiguity.
Maintaining capacity to intervene militarily in defense of Taiwan is definitely much more ambiguous than "yes the US will intervene militarily....".

Clearly. :D