How much of a hawk is Biden going to be in his term?

[Pericles]

America is back in the game because people overseas like here in New Zealand no longer think you're a mess and a joke but will respect America again. America's reputation will be greatly enhanced and Biden can bring other nations together on stuff like climate change, the Covid response and yes taking on Russia and China. There will also be no more of these dumb job killing trade wars.

Yes, Biden will be very good at preserving Chinese jobs.

Free trade is better for everyone, it's American jobs that Trump killed.

That's simply not true. 

https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/trumps-economy-creating-manufacturing-jobs/

In the 17 months prior to Obama's town hall (January 2015 to May 2016), the U.S. Department of Labor calculated that 40,000 manufacturing jobs (seasonally adjusted) had been created for a total of 12,336,000 jobs, anemic growth of about 0.3% over the period. By December 2016, Obama's last full month in office, manufacturing employment was up 55,000 jobs from January 2015.

On October 5, 2018, the Department of Labor released its national jobs report for September, showing unemployment had hit a 49-year-low at 3.7% with 134,000 jobs added last month of which 18,000 were in manufacturing.

New Zealanders may well benefit from "free trade".  China certainly does.  America does not.

It's basic economics, ever heard of competitive advantage?

[John Dule]

He's filling his cabinet with hawks, he brags to the world that America "is back in the game" aka bombing people in the Middle East and fighting wars for Israel, he thinks Russia is the #1 enemy instead of China (hmm wonder why that is), he also wants wants Antony Blinken for SoS, known warmonger. Not to when both him and Biden proposed their psychotic plans to partition Iraq.

So will Biden end up being more interventionist than Obama?

If you seriously think this didn't happen under Trump, you're even dumber than I initially gave you credit for.

[darklordoftech]

He's filling his cabinet with hawks, he brags to the world that America "is back in the game" aka bombing people in the Middle East and fighting wars for Israel, he thinks Russia is the #1 enemy instead of China (hmm wonder why that is), he also wants wants Antony Blinken for SoS, known warmonger. Not to when both him and Biden proposed their psychotic plans to partition Iraq.

So will Biden end up being more interventionist than Obama?

Trump has bombed A LOT in the Middle East. I've heard this recurring "NO NEW WARS!" theme from Trump supporters time and time again, as if he were a pacificst. He isn't. In fact, he's broken records for bombing Afghanistan and Yemen.

The Trump base anti-war movement isn’t about bringing “peace” to people in other countries and respecting their lives and sovereignty though. They don’t care, just like democrats don’t too. You miss the point if you think they care whether Trump is a pacifist.

It is an anti-war movement with more nationalist arguments, such as protecting lives of Americans instead of unnecessarily risking their lives for nothing and also focusing more on internal issues than wasting time and money doing stuff in other places. Goes back to their “America First” slogan and calls to bring troops back to the country.

I find the revisionism surrounding the Iraq War interesting. At the time, it was promoted as a war to protect Americans from terrorism. Supporters of the Iraq War used all the same arguements and phrases that supporters of the assassination of Soleimani use now. Nationalists tended to support it while internationalists tended to oppose it. How is “Freedom Fries” any different from “America First”? Now, people think the Iraq War was an internationalist war.

For further evidence of how consistent the foreign policies of the parties are, In 1996, the New York Times published an op-ed attacking Bob Dole for wanting to “nation-build” and mentions Dole’s ties to The Weekly Standard, even while Dole attacked Clinton for using the UN to “nation-build”: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/06/opinion/doles-military-card.html. Also, in 1988, Lee Atwater attacked Dukakis for being a “multilaterist”, and in 1999 and 2000, Republicans attacked Clinton for using NATO in Kosovo.

Using the logic that the “Hillary/Biden are more neocon than Trump” people use, you could argue that Bill Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Obama were more “neoconservative” than Bush 43, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

He's filling his cabinet with hawks, he brags to the world that America "is back in the game" aka bombing people in the Middle East and fighting wars for Israel, he thinks Russia is the #1 enemy instead of China (hmm wonder why that is), he also wants wants Antony Blinken for SoS, known warmonger. Not to when both him and Biden proposed their psychotic plans to partition Iraq.

So will Biden end up being more interventionist than Obama?

Trump has bombed A LOT in the Middle East. I've heard this recurring "NO NEW WARS!" theme from Trump supporters time and time again, as if he were a pacificst. He isn't. In fact, he's broken records for bombing Afghanistan and Yemen.

The Trump base anti-war movement isn’t about bringing “peace” to people in other countries and respecting their lives and sovereignty though. They don’t care, just like democrats don’t too. You miss the point if you think they care whether Trump is a pacifist.

It is an anti-war movement with more nationalist arguments, such as protecting lives of Americans instead of unnecessarily risking their lives for nothing and also focusing more on internal issues than wasting time and money doing stuff in other places. Goes back to their “America First” slogan and calls to bring troops back to the country.

I find the revisionism surrounding the Iraq War interesting. At the time, it was promoted as a war to protect Americans from terrorism. Supporters of the Iraq War used all the same arguements and phrases that supporters of the assassination of Soleimani use now. Nationalists tended to support it while internationalists tended to oppose it. How is “Freedom Fries” any different from “America First”? Now, people think the Iraq War was an internationalist war.

For further evidence of how consistent the foreign policies of the parties are, In 1996, the New York Times published an op-ed attacking Bob Dole for wanting to “nation-build” and mentions Dole’s ties to The Weekly Standard, even while Dole attacked Clinton for using the UN to “nation-build”: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/06/opinion/doles-military-card.html. Also, in 1988, Lee Atwater attacked Dukakis for being a “multilaterist”, and in 1999 and 2000, Republicans attacked Clinton for using NATO in Kosovo.

Using the logic that the “Hillary/Biden are more neocon than Trump” people use, you could argue that Bill Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Obama were more “neoconservative” than Bush 43, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz.

In 1998, Biden was advocating invading Iraq because of WMD, so the Democratic party is certainly not an anti-war war.

[Benjamin Frank]

He's filling his cabinet with hawks, he brags to the world that America "is back in the game" aka bombing people in the Middle East and fighting wars for Israel, he thinks Russia is the #1 enemy instead of China (hmm wonder why that is), he also wants wants Antony Blinken for SoS, known warmonger. Not to when both him and Biden proposed their psychotic plans to partition Iraq.

So will Biden end up being more interventionist than Obama?

If you seriously think this didn't happen under Trump, you're even dumber than I initially gave you credit for.

I don't know about 'dumb' but SirWoodbury was certainly fooled.  In March 2019 the Trump Administration stopped the government from reporting on drone strike deaths:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207

This has clearly fooled the people who support Trump because they think he was the 'peace candidate' or the 'peace president' into believing that Trump had reduced or eliminated drone strikes.  In fact, according to the best estimates, the number of drone strikes and deaths increased dramatically under Trump.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2019/5/8/18619206/under-donald-trump-drone-strikes-far-exceed-obama-s-numbers

More broadly, I think it's accurate to say that Trump was on both sides of many issues, and people who wanted to support him could pick and choose what they wanted from him.

For instance,  Trump claimed to be a 'peace president' but he nearly got the United States into a shooting war with both China (over North Korea) and Iran (might still get into a war with Iran.)  Fair enough that in the end he backed down and may have just been engaging in brinksmanship, but similar actions from other Presidents would probably not have them considered as 'peace presidents.'

And, Trump simultaneously mentioned the 'military industrial complex' of the U.S Generals and the defense contractors that favors increased military spending, while also bragging about how he had saved the military after it was supposedly underfunded by Obama.

[darklordoftech]

The only way in which Trump is less “neoconservative” than Speaker Gingrich, 1996 Dole, or Bush 43 is his lack of desire to expand NATO.

[darklordoftech]

He's filling his cabinet with hawks, he brags to the world that America "is back in the game" aka bombing people in the Middle East and fighting wars for Israel, he thinks Russia is the #1 enemy instead of China (hmm wonder why that is), he also wants wants Antony Blinken for SoS, known warmonger. Not to when both him and Biden proposed their psychotic plans to partition Iraq.

So will Biden end up being more interventionist than Obama?

Trump has bombed A LOT in the Middle East. I've heard this recurring "NO NEW WARS!" theme from Trump supporters time and time again, as if he were a pacificst. He isn't. In fact, he's broken records for bombing Afghanistan and Yemen.

The Trump base anti-war movement isn’t about bringing “peace” to people in other countries and respecting their lives and sovereignty though. They don’t care, just like democrats don’t too. You miss the point if you think they care whether Trump is a pacifist.

It is an anti-war movement with more nationalist arguments, such as protecting lives of Americans instead of unnecessarily risking their lives for nothing and also focusing more on internal issues than wasting time and money doing stuff in other places. Goes back to their “America First” slogan and calls to bring troops back to the country.

I find the revisionism surrounding the Iraq War interesting. At the time, it was promoted as a war to protect Americans from terrorism. Supporters of the Iraq War used all the same arguements and phrases that supporters of the assassination of Soleimani use now. Nationalists tended to support it while internationalists tended to oppose it. How is “Freedom Fries” any different from “America First”? Now, people think the Iraq War was an internationalist war.

For further evidence of how consistent the foreign policies of the parties are, In 1996, the New York Times published an op-ed attacking Bob Dole for wanting to “nation-build” and mentions Dole’s ties to The Weekly Standard, even while Dole attacked Clinton for using the UN to “nation-build”: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/06/opinion/doles-military-card.html. Also, in 1988, Lee Atwater attacked Dukakis for being a “multilaterist”, and in 1999 and 2000, Republicans attacked Clinton for using NATO in Kosovo.

Using the logic that the “Hillary/Biden are more neocon than Trump” people use, you could argue that Bill Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Obama were more “neoconservative” than Bush 43, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz.

In 1998, Biden was advocating invading Iraq because of WMD, so the Democratic party is certainly not an anti-war war.

At the time, Biden wrote an op-ed where he said that he was accusing the weapons inspector of wanting to go war, not advocating war himself: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1998/09/19/i-meant-no-disrespect/6acd6366-2058-4a7c-83cd-da4d345c144d/

““I stated, "You have indicated your job is to disarm, and the only way to disarm is to have access, and the only way you can have access is either with permission or, if denied, forced access, right?"

Ritter answered, "Compelled access, yes, sir."

In my view, that means that an inspector, by forcing an inspection, can be taking the first steps that might lead the United States to war. I told Ritter -- and I still believe -- that a decision with those implications is "above his pay grade." I meant no disrespect and so stated at the hearing. I meant only that such a decision can only be made by the president, advised by the secretaries of defense and state.

As Fred Hiatt stated in his column, "Whether to use force, how to marshal support for it at home and abroad for its use -- these are tough questions that, as Albright suggests, are beyond Ritter's responsibility." I agree.”

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Biden has publicly committed to turning away from the Obama-Trump policy on Yemen and Saudi Arabia.  He was opposed to the Libya invasion.   However he seems to be surrounding himself with those who advocated these and other disastrous policies of the past few decades.

[darklordoftech]

Cheney and Rumsfeld voted for Trump, yet people think they became Democrats in 2016.