United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread

[Basileus_Komnenos]

so the world belongs to the "gods", the rest of are just toys that may occasional get crumbs?

Umm...what? I don't understand what this is supposed to mean.

What I was trying to say is that while the US shouldn't be the world's policeman (as it spreads its forces too thin), it can't exactly retreat from global affairs altogether either as that would bring a whole different set of problems. There should be some sort of middle ground between being a war-hawk and an isolationist.

 

[Cherico]

Umm...what? I don't understand what this is supposed to mean.

What I was trying to say is that while the US shouldn't be the world's policeman (as it spreads its forces too thin), it can't exactly retreat from global affairs altogether either as that would bring a whole different set of problems. There should be some sort of middle ground between being a war-hawk and an isolationist.

The problem with the current Pax americana is that it is expensive and in order for it to continue there has to be something in it for the american people. for the last 30 years the world has coasted on a free seucurity garentee for all of the oceanic traffic in the world. That is not sustainable the american people clearly do not want to do something that expensive in blood and treasure for free.

It has to be a reciptical relationship and for the most part that is not the case.

The solutions to this problem is either the americans go home and everything goes on fire or the americcan hedgemony is replaced by an actual american empire. Which no one wants least of all the american people but will probally happen anyways.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Umm...what? I don't understand what this is supposed to mean.

What I was trying to say is that while the US shouldn't be the world's policeman (as it spreads its forces too thin), it can't exactly retreat from global affairs altogether either as that would bring a whole different set of problems. There should be some sort of middle ground between being a war-hawk and an isolationist.

I'm at the point where I'm not convinced we are capable of a middle ground

 

[ATP]

You would if you're unemployed and need money to pay the rent.

Sorry for lack of precision - since i do not live in USA,i do not care if american get money or not.
Important thing is - would Biden lockdawn kill USA economy? becouse that would be disaster for entire world.

 

[Zachowon]

Yes

They can't fight thier wars in the middle east at that point. And they would have to have a draft in order to get the numbers needed

you under estimate just how unbelivably stupid and arrogant they are, expecially the arrogance part.

No, I just know how stubborn the military is and how it has survived as long as it has without crumbling. It has only had one major split and that was the civil war, and there are things in place to protect a soldier from persecution of thier political stance, and really anything. Even being white is protected.

The military adapts because it has to. And they often go along with things and then leave it in place but never enforce.

 

[LordsFire]

They can't fight thier wars in the middle east at that point. And they would have to have a draft in order to get the numbers needed

No, I just know how stubborn the military is and how it has survived as long as it has without crumbling. It has only had one major split and that was the civil war, and there are things in place to protect a soldier from persecution of thier political stance, and really anything. Even being white is protected.

The military adapts because it has to. And they often go along with things and then leave it in place but never enforce.

A lot of the people on the left seriously believe in the 'End of History,' and that wars are basically a thing of the past. Further, that the thing most responsible for keeping permanent peace from settling, is the existence of the American military, which in their minds is inherently provocative.

Yes, there are people that genuinely believe this.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

A lot of the people on the left seriously believe in the 'End of History,' and that wars are basically a thing of the past. Further, that the thing most responsible for keeping permanent peace from settling, is the existence of the American military, which in their minds is inherently provocative.

Yes, there are people that genuinely believe this.

The thing keeping the peace is MAD and we know what the left thinks of nukes.

 

[LordsFire]

The thing keeping the peace is MAD and we know what the left thinks of nukes.

To quote:

"If the Americans will beat their swords and guns into plowshares and tractors, surely the Soviets will do the same."

 

[Bear Ribs]

Umm...what? I don't understand what this is supposed to mean.

What I was trying to say is that while the US shouldn't be the world's policeman (as it spreads its forces too thin), it can't exactly retreat from global affairs altogether either as that would bring a whole different set of problems. There should be some sort of middle ground between being a war-hawk and an isolationist.

I don't believe there is such a middle ground, actually. I'm not a huge fan of Bayesian logic but I think it's suitable here. There's only three possibilities:

You are the world's policeman.
Somebody else is.
Nobody is.

Nobody being the world's policeman will lead to whoever can filling the gap and taking that power, quite possibly after a bloody war with other would-be policemen for the position. China's trying to establish their dominance over the South China Sea right now but if they could instead dominate and regulate trade across all the oceans of the world do you think they wouldn't? Of course they would.

Being the world's policeman puts you in an inherently superior position. Regardless of good intentions, you have a certain amount of advantage and in things like negotiations you're going to come out ahead compared to nations that rely on you for protection. There's no way around that and it's a perk of the job.

Now it's possible the cost of being the policeman is higher than it's benefits. The US is in a weird position that due to constantly swapping leadership, it can rarely stay aimed at a single target more than 8 years before tearing whatever it built down out of spite for the previous ruler. Another country that was more willing to squeeze and that had a more stable government could abuse policeman status far more. But it wouldn't be to the US's benefit to let somebody else, and by that I mean China because they're the main contender, control world trade.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

I don't believe there is such a middle ground, actually. I'm not a huge fan of Bayesian logic but I think it's suitable here. There's only three possibilities:

You are the world's policeman.
Somebody else is.
Nobody is.

Nobody being the world's policeman will lead to whoever can filling the gap and taking that power, quite possibly after a bloody war with other would-be policemen for the position. China's trying to establish their dominance over the South China Sea right now but if they could instead dominate and regulate trade across all the oceans of the world do you think they wouldn't? Of course they would.

Being the world's policeman puts you in an inherently superior position. Regardless of good intentions, you have a certain amount of advantage and in things like negotiations you're going to come out ahead compared to nations that rely on you for protection. There's no way around that and it's a perk of the job.

Now it's possible the cost of being the policeman is higher than it's benefits. The US is in a weird position that due to constantly swapping leadership, it can rarely stay aimed at a single target more than 8 years before tearing whatever it built down out of spite for the previous ruler. Another country that was more willing to squeeze and that had a more stable government could abuse policeman status far more. But it wouldn't be to the US's benefit to let somebody else, and by that I mean China because they're the main contender, control world trade.

The question is who is stability for? As the old phrase goes "with friends like these who needs enemies."

 

[Bear Ribs]

The question is who is stability for? As the old phrase goes "with friends like these who needs enemies."

Shrug. So imagine this scenario. The US never built a huge navy. It's only got two carriers and usually one's in the dock at any given moment. Meanwhile China is operating fifteen aircraft carriers in all oceans and controls all trade routes, Chinese is the lingua franca that students study as their second language in school and that most documents are written in. The Internet uses mainly the Chinese alphabet with small enclaves of English on a few small boards here and there. American companies generally need to work according to Chinese censorship or fall afoul of Chinese internet providers. You can trade Chinese currency virtually anywhere and many third-world citizens prefer it over their own country's. China produces a bulk of the world's movies and if you can't speak Chinese, that's what subtitles are for. If there's an oil crises, all the tankers go to China first and if there's any oil left after their needs are met, then it can go to the US and Europe.

Do you see the US as being better off in this scenario without the expense of their navy or is this a worse situation?

As I said, the US is downright bipolar about it's power because every new president wants to undo the previous president's work. This makes it really hard for the US to actually leverage it's status because every nation knows even if they get in an unfavorable situation, in 4-8 years a new President will show up and they can reverse it. But that hardly means the US is worse off than it would be if somebody else led, merely that it hasn't extracted the maximum advantage it could.

 

[Jormungandr]

I think Civil War is coming, but it won't be a "clean" break like in the First Civil War: it's going to be an insidious little bastard, where opposing views, ideologies, and actions in civilian, government, and military areas alike will essentially breed inside each other like parasites.

Hell, half of the country, and even some of Left-aligned people, still view Biden as an illegitimate President due to fraud.

Things are going to go to shit this year or by next year, by the latest.

Biden has already broken pretty much all of his campaign promises within the first month of "assuming office", and already we're seeing political, ideological, and cultural purges sponsored by the government.

Shit's going to get real, consequences in the short and long terms be damned.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Shrug. So imagine this scenario. The US never built a huge navy. It's only got two carriers and usually one's in the dock at any given moment. Meanwhile China is operating fifteen aircraft carriers in all oceans and controls all trade routes, Chinese is the lingua franca that students study as their second language in school and that most documents are written in. The Internet uses mainly the Chinese alphabet with small enclaves of English on a few small boards here and there. American companies generally need to work according to Chinese censorship or fall afoul of Chinese internet providers. You can trade Chinese currency virtually anywhere and many third-world citizens prefer it over their own country's. China produces a bulk of the world's movies and if you can't speak Chinese, that's what subtitles are for. If there's an oil crises, all the tankers go to China first and if there's any oil left after their needs are met, then it can go to the US and Europe.

Do you see the US as being better off in this scenario without the expense of their navy or is this a worse situation?

As I said, the US is downright bipolar about it's power because every new president wants to undo the previous president's work. This makes it really hard for the US to actually leverage it's status because every nation knows even if they get in an unfavorable situation, in 4-8 years a new President will show up and they can reverse it. But that hardly means the US is worse off than it would be if somebody else led, merely that it hasn't extracted the maximum advantage it could.

the question is the domestic cost of Biden for life outweigh the benefits of global profit. For the ingenious people yes yes and heck yes for the elite of course the benefits out weigh the cost this is why the nationalism vs globalism war exist in the first place, because it's a zero sum game.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

I think Civil War is coming, but it won't be a "clean" break like in the First Civil War: it's going to be an insidious little bastard, where opposing views, ideologies, and actions in civilian, government, and military areas alike will essentially breed inside each other like parasites.

Hell, half of the country, and even some of Left-aligned people, still view Biden as an illegitimate President due to fraud.

Things are going to go to shit this year or by next year, by the latest.

Biden has already broken pretty much all of his campaign promises within the first month of "assuming office", and already we're seeing political, ideological, and cultural purges sponsored by the government.

Shit's going to get real, consequences in the short and long terms be damned.

the disadvantage of being a species is conflict.

 

[Doomsought]

I think Civil War is coming, but it won't be a "clean" break like in the First Civil War: it's going to be an insidious little bastard, where opposing views, ideologies, and actions in civilian, government, and military areas alike will essentially breed inside each other like parasites.

I disagree. The right is too invested in their lives to rise up without the states being involved. What is going to happen is that one of the states will refuse to obey an executive order, and then Biden or Harris will send in the troops to make them obey.

Watch Texas and South Dekota, those states are the right sort of troublemakers. Kristi Noem has stuck to her guns better than the Texans, however Texas is too big, loud and important to ignore at the times when they do stand up to Washington.

 

[Jormungandr]

I disagree. The right is too invested in their lives to rise up without the states being involved. What is going to happen is that one of the states will refuse to obey an executive order, and then Biden or Harris will send in the troops to make them obey.

Watch Texas and South Dekota, those states are the right sort of troublemakers. Kristi Noem has stuck to her guns better than the Texans, however Texas is too big, loud and important to ignore at the times when they do stand up to Washington.

The latter is being caused by the former being disrupted or even outright destroyed due to the current regime's core ideologies and stances, causing a gradual feedback loop. The more the former is disrupted, the more the latter will intervene on their behalf, causing more issues from the regime, which will cause more disruption to the former.

I'm not seeing this ending well for anyone involved.

 

[Zachowon]

I disagree. The right is too invested in their lives to rise up without the states being involved. What is going to happen is that one of the states will refuse to obey an executive order, and then Biden or Harris will send in the troops to make them obey.

Watch Texas and South Dekota, those states are the right sort of troublemakers. Kristi Noem has stuck to her guns better than the Texans, however Texas is too big, loud and important to ignore at the times when they do stand up to Washington.

And federal troops will not want to do that. A lot come from Texas, and wouldn't want that in the first place, and then you have to include the demoralizing aspect of being sent on your own country lands to enforce something minor when perhaps your own town was burned down during the riots and nothing happend to them.

 

[Terthna]

The latter is being caused by the former being disrupted or even outright destroyed due to the current regime's core ideologies and stances, causing a gradual feedback loop. The more the former is disrupted, the more the latter will intervene on their behalf, causing more issues from the regime, which will cause more disruption to the former.

I'm not seeing this ending well for anyone involved.

I'm expecting a lot of street violence and domestic terrorist attacks going forward, as people begin to take the words of Shylock to heart: "Thou call'dst me dog before thou hadst a cause; But, since I am a dog, beware my fangs."

Mind you, odds are it will be counterproductive, and won't really affect the establishment all that much; seeing as, thanks to an incredibly successful divide and conquer strategy, most of it will just be the plebs fighting amongst themselves. The ruling class will be left virtually untouched, and will rule over the ashes after the smoke clears.

And thus, the Soviet Union claims victory from beyond the grave; as their effort to undermine and destroy American society finally bears its terrible fruit.

 

[History Learner]

I think Civil War is coming, but it won't be a "clean" break like in the First Civil War: it's going to be an insidious little bastard, where opposing views, ideologies, and actions in civilian, government, and military areas alike will essentially breed inside each other like parasites.

Hell, half of the country, and even some of Left-aligned people, still view Biden as an illegitimate President due to fraud.

Things are going to go to shit this year or by next year, by the latest.

Biden has already broken pretty much all of his campaign promises within the first month of "assuming office", and already we're seeing political, ideological, and cultural purges sponsored by the government.

Shit's going to get real, consequences in the short and long terms be damned.

The past month has been very instructive to me, in that the parallels to the collapse of the USSR are increasingly astonishing. I found it interesting that, in the aftermath of the January 6th incident they were screening troops-openly, mind you, which is a first-for political reliability for use in Washington. Now, they are going even further with some ill defined stand down coming up. If the system, which is already viewed as illegitimate and has been for some time by the wider public, has lost or is in the process of losing its monopoly on force, then it's not long for this world.

 

[JagerIV]

@Zachowon , what exactly stops a pro Biden appointment, when Biden asks them to jump, from asking how high?

If a political appointment points at you and calls you a racist subversvie, how much protection do you really have?

You place I think a little too much faith that the dictators will respect the rules. And based on the stories in hearing from some active duty, I think you overstimate how loyal the soldiers will be to each other when there is a reward for betrayal.