by UVB-76, you're hinging Biden's mental decline on there never having been a stutter... that's a weak position. That's why it's easy to dismiss. Assume he's had a stutter - and then argue that ppl are using it as cover for his obvious mental decline. The two can both be true (they are).
Biden's policy stance on Ireland's border might be good for Ireland (Boris's was doing just fine on its own getting people to rethink old allegiances); but since Ireland is 0.06% of the world population, I think Biden's 'foreign policy' is to be judged on much more.
Xinjiang is another canard, UVB-76... I doubt anyone here's going to push back on the genocide narrative, but try to follow it to original sources & study the language of the reporting. It's not impressive. If nothing else, it should remind you not to regurgitate propaganda. China is a police state, and so is the USA, and so are plenty of other countries. (USA ranks #1 per capita with 640 prisoners per 100k, compared to China's 120. US is also #1 in raw numbers, with 6:5 ratio of prisoners vs China - and China has 4+ times as many people.) But neither China nor the US = "Third Reich" like you claim on page 3. More to the point: Biden's main foreign policy objective is confrontation with China (imo even his confrontation with Russia and Iran are related to China), so your claim that he's too accommodating to China is weird - given, for example, that increased conflict could lead to limited nuclear engagement (which is a misnomer). I hope he's being more accommodating than he sounds - both on the highly distorted Uyghur issue and, more significantly, on Taiwan & Hong Kong. If it turns out he is, after all, slapping down the China hawks in his cabinet, the world is better off.
Not for nothing, but: Americans are pretty limited in their nuanced treatment of 'foreigners', so that China rhetoric is actually translating to some real hate crimes here, by people who can't tell Sikhs from Arabs. Biden (what's left of him) is a competent manager of American stupidity, so the more he does to quell that brainless tradition, the better. On the whole I think he's feeding it.
Khashoggi came up, for some reason. Yes, Trump was 'cozy' with S.Arabia, and so is every other US president since at least the 70s, Biden included. Trump slithered out of the way to let Turkey invade Syria, almost certainly in part because of Turkey's dirt on MBS. Biden played the western media by pretending to chastize MBS, in placing his first official call to the king himself & bypassing the prince. Ooo... that's serious business. On Yemen, Biden duped westerners again by using that slithery double-speak, which should've been immediately obvious. But it doesn't matter because what's deciding the fate of Yemen is the fact that S.Arabia/UAE lost the war. Yemen was terrorized by the world's foremost war criminals (the USA + client states) and it survived. What's left to see is how long Biden will keep the cartel sanctions in place, or if he'll find the right doublespeak to slither us out of there.
For some reason, FDR is mentioned... uh... FDR was only inclined to engage the war because it was the best ticket to full economic recovery (short-term) and would lead to the US supplanting western Europe as the power center of the world (long-term). Shrewd on both counts, and correct. If you think he was motivated by some deep hatred of Hitlerism, UVB-76, er, no. I'm sure FDR was ready to make deals, which he did - see Czechoslovakia.
UVB-76 wrote:I may not be the world's biggest fan of the 13% and there are solid reasons for that but I've definitely met a few who were probably at least north of a 120 IQ score, or at least 115. Even if I didn't like them, they weren't stupid in most respects. I still also have a certain measure of respect for Obama to this day for some of the research and education initiatives he was involved in starting, and I truly think he's a smart guy.
"The 13%" huh. Buddy, if you're a white American, and this thread represents how far your thinking & curiosity go, it's not impressive. If I were you I'd hesitate to make such generalizations, lest you embarrass your people (what do we call that... the... 72%?).
Your 'respect' for Obama is probably some crypto-fascist admiration for how few fucks he gives, his enrichment of himself and his cronies, his expansion of unconstitutional Patriot Act powers, his various war crimes, his mass deportations, and his occasional Cosby-style scoldings of "the 13%". You know: the stuff about him that reminds you of Trump and, by extension, of yourself. As for gauging Obama's intelligence... you don't have what it takes. He had more complex ideas about the world by the time he hit puberty, than you probably ever will (partly thanks to his humanist mother, and having grown up abroad).
That's arguably blurting offensive stuff out already but Joe Biden is much worse and he's supposed to be our POTUS, whose former President of the same party had nothing but disdain for him, while having much less tact than an Internet shitposter.
Biden is a white supremacist, and Obama didn't want him to run, both those things are true... "Tact" doesn't mean anything. "Tact" is just you trolling libs. Politicians say and do whatever they think will get people to comply, and Biden's had about half a century of electoral success - though he needed a ton of help for this last one, including from Obama.
The ppl counter-trolling you avoid most of the accidentally legitimate points you bring up, because they're not of any actual concern to you or to most of them.
1882 wasn’t very long ago. Heck, I grew up with ppl who could remember almost that far back.