Political Opinion

During a speech at the White House on Wednesday… A dazed and confused President Joe Biden spoke about his administration’s efforts to lower the cost of healthcare for US citizens…

After the Speech he turned around and wandered off stage… Refusing to answer questions about the death of aid workers in Gaza…

This is getting more and more ridiculous by the day… It’s Joe’s handlers the United States needs to be worried and embarrassed about… The Oval Office is just a Weekend at Bernie’s…

His handlers are the real concern…

In that case, the majority is forever lost and there is no hope for them

Humans have capacity to understand morality and unite under morality. However, whether they will make the choice to do so is another story.

All political parties engage in immoral actions. Sending hundreds of missiles every year to foreign countries. Those missiles weren’t fired in self-defense. Funding terrorists with tax money. Waging unnecessary wars to kill innocent people. Trying to take away people’s right to decide what goes in their bodies. Various forms of legalized theft.

Humans have a utopian idea that they can perfect the world through endless violence.

Communism is an idea that you can create utopia by stealing resources from producers and giving them to lazy people who don’t want to do anything to get them. Having to work for resources isn’t bad by itself. If people learn to share voluntarily, then you don’t have to work so hard to just live a basic life.

There is no valid excuse for theft. Communism promotes theft. Socialism is just a variant of communism. Stealing resources for any purpose cannot be justified.

OOP’s… And now it all starts to ooze outO’Biden’s Freudian slips are everywhere as the pretence is difficult to maintain… If this comes as a surprise then you are not paying attention…

He sure loves reminding everyone how not in control he is…It’s so obvious that Senile Joe wasn’t calling the shots in the US all along…

Yup, Obama… Only President in US history to not move out of DC after his term was over… :thinking:

Ohio law banning nearly all abortions now invalid after referendum, attorney general says

A 2019 law banning most abortions in Ohio is unconstitutional following an abortion referendum last year, the state’s Republican attorney general said in a court filing Monday.

The filing comes after abortion clinics asked a Hamilton County judge to throw out the law since Ohio voters decided to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution last November.

They argue that under the new constitutional amendment, the law, which bans most abortions once fetal cardiac activity can be detected, is invalid. Attorney General Dave Yost, for the most part, agreed.

However, the attorney general asked the court to only strike down the “core prohibition” of the law — banning abortions after six weeks — and let other portions remain. These include requiring a doctor to check for a heartbeat and inform a patient, as well as documenting the reason someone is having an abortion. Yost said in the filing that the plaintiffs have not demonstrated how such provisions violate the constitutional amendment.

The state “respects the will of the people,” a spokesperson for Yost’s office said in an email, but is also obligated to prevent overreach and protect parts of the law the amendment doesn’t address.

Freda Levenson, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, called the continued litigation “quibbling about extraneous matters” in an emailed statement, and disagreed that such issues have ever been a problem before in this case.

“This case should be over. Stick a fork in it,” she said in the statement.

The law signed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine in April 2019 prohibited most abortions after the first detectable “fetal heartbeat.” Cardiac activity can be detected as early as six weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

The ban, initially blocked through a federal legal challenge, briefly went into effect when the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision was overturned in 2022. It was then placed back on hold in county court, as part of a subsequent lawsuit challenging it as unconstitutional under the Ohio Constitution, eventually reaching the state Supreme Court.

In December 2023, the state’s highest court dismissed an appeal brought by Yost’s office " due to a change in the law.” This sent the case back to the lower courts, where it now resides.

The case now awaits a decision by Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas Judge Christian Jenkins.

Ohio law banning nearly all abortions now invalid after referendum, attorney general says

As Australians already begged U.S. for help, we assured the little boys, but if the need arises we should treat them as some suggest we should treat Ukraine.

Australia ‘facing threat of war with China within three years’

A ustralians are being warned today they face the threat of war with China within three years, but the country is unprepared for any conflict with the rising Asian superpower.

A panel of national security experts assembled by The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age has warned war could come as early as 2026, with a Chinese invasion of Taiwan a major potential flashpoint.

The experts believe the federal government’s advice that Australia has less than 10 years’ of warning of conflict needs revising.

Their report “Red Alert” is a big wake-up call for Australia’s armed forces and the nation as a whole, warning the nation is unprepared.

The three-part subscriber series comes at arguably the most significant moment in Australian defence policy since World War II, with the federal government set to release its response to the defence strategic review as well as reveal the type of submarine technology it will acquire under the AUKUS pact.

The five respected experts - former senior Defence Department official Peter Jennings, Macquarie University senior lecturer in strategic studies and criminology Lavina Lee, former chief scientist of Australia Alan Finkel, National Institute of Strategic Resilience chair Lesley Seebeck and retired Army major general Mick Ryan - all met in person over nearly two days to examine a range of scenarios and to determine whether Australia is ready for war.

With the world’s ammunition stocks and military hardware fast being consumed by war in Ukraine, the panel warned that an opportunistic grab for Taiwan could result in 200,000 US troops pouring into Australia.

This could see Chinese missiles attacking Australians military facilities and cyber attacks on critical infrastructure.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/australia-faces-threat-of-war-with-china-within-three-years-experts-warn/9c757e9c-d0e7-4b33-9a0f-70546858c736

@SmallPaul Must be a quiet news day in the Trailer Park…

Scatter guns posts about anything and everything to distract attention from the string pulling of the current incompetent, lame duck US President… Let’s go Brandon…

Weak countries will always beg the U.S. for assistance, and Australia is no different

Correct… Australia isn’t belligerent enough to end up like Zelenskyy’s devastated Ukraine…

And that’s why a Senile, Incompetent and Deluded US President is dangerous for the rest of the free world…

It is no secret that Australia is a weak country, as I stated above. You must kiss the backside of the U.S., you have no choice in the matter.

To the Brits, much love.

There’s no better feeling than pride and country over an outsider, but unfortunately you can’t say the same. :v:

@SmallPaul, You are so full of shite… Australia is one of the safest, best quality of life Nation’s on the Planet… One of the best Passports to have…

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Quality of Life - U.S. News Best Countries Report 2023

as

Don’t see the United States in the Top 10…

Australia in the Top 10 again… Don’t see the United States… Again…

Even according to your Leftist News Outlet Yahoo Finance… Australia is Ranked 14th for countries with the highest quality life compared to the United States way back in 21st…

As usual … You have no idea what you are talking about… The Clown you voted for opened the Border and has wrecked the US’s Economy and quality of life for years to come…

@Trendswithbenefits

Interesting list.

Regarding Canada, ranked first in that list …

My daughter, born in the US, has dual US/Canadian citizenship and lives in Canada (British Columbia) with her family. She and her husband are totally contemptuous of Justin Trudeau, the woke-wussy Prime Minister of Canada. but they seem content with their Provincial government in British Columbia. And overall, they much prefer life in Canada, to life in the US.

On my various visits to Canada — both eastern and western Canada — I have not witnessed major discontent, on the part of Canadians, with their economic circumstances. So, I was very surprised to read the following article by Byron King in The Rude Awakening — surprised that there seems to be growing discontent among the population, and surprised also that the source of this information is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), the national police force of Canada.

Who knew that socio-economic research and analysis is a police function in Canada?

If this article is an accurate representation of sentiment in Canada, it challenges their No. 1 ranking in the list you posted.

Here’s a link to the Byron King article: Canada’s Downfall | The Rude Awakening

And here are some excerpts from that article:

Canada’s Downfall
According to Canada’s National Post, from which I borrowed the headline above, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) has warned the government in Ottawa that “Canada may descend into civil unrest once citizens realize the hopelessness of their economic situation.”

Per the RCMP, “The coming period of recession will … accelerate the decline in living standards that the younger generations have already witnessed compared to earlier generations.”

You want doom and gloom? Downfall? Look north, to Canada. And again, this message comes not from some bellyaching newsletter editor; no, it’s straight from the RCMP, Canada’s national police force, which runs a branch focused on social, political, and economic analysis.

By way of background, in mid-2022 – just after the “Trucker” event; see below – the RCMP began work on a report for high-level political actors in Ottawa, the seat of Canada’s federal government.

The first cut of the RCMP report painted such a funerary image of a diminished future that it was officially classified as “Secret.” But some things are so incendiary that they don’t long stay under wraps. Heavily redacted, the report is now out there.

U.S. assistance is still needed for this weak country.

As a result of Biden’s immigration policies and the border crisis, this is potentially the year when the curse is broken.

2024 will mark 20 years since Republicans last won the popular vote. Can they rebrand in time to stop losing streak?

2024 will mark a sorry anniversary for the Republican Party: 20 years since President George W. Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign won both the popular and Electoral College votes. That feat has since eluded three GOP presidential nominees and one incumbent.

The critical question is, “Are Republicans capable of nominating a winning ticket to halt this embarrassing losing trend?” I doubt it since rapidly changing demographics are reducing the Republicans’ popular vote count in battleground states.

In 2016, Donald Trump was elected president by winning only the Electoral College — a political fluke that he did not repeat in 2020. Moreover, the demeaning label “illegitimate president” can haunt a commander in chief who wins without the popular vote. Just ask George W. Bush, circa 2000.

To understand how this forthcoming non-celebratory 20th anniversary of continuous political loss manifested itself, let’s begin with notable 2004 state voting data and compare it to 2020 state results.

But first, the basic facts: Incumbent President George W. Bush defeated Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in a demure, respectable campaign by today’s standards. Bush won the popular vote 50.7 to 48.3 percent and the Electoral College vote 286 to 251.

Subsequently, four states totaling 32 electoral votes that contributed to Bush topping 270 in 2004 have since become GOP Electoral College “dropouts.” Starting in 2008, every Democratic presidential ticket has won the following states (with their 2024 electoral votes in parentheses): Virginia (13), Colorado (10), Nevada (6) and New Mexico (5).

Where does the Republican Party go to replace those 34 electoral votes? Good question. GOP presidential candidates dream about turning back the clock but wake up to face this daunting data:

In 2004, Bush won Virginia by a safe 8.2 percentage point margin, but in 2020 Biden won by an even safer 10.1 points.

Colorado used to be Bush country by a comfortable margin of 4.7 percentage points. Then in 2020, Biden achieved an astounding 13.5-point victory.

New Mexico was a 2004 Bush squeaker where he won by 0.7 percentage point. Yet, Biden triumphed with 10.8 points.

Then in Nevada, Bush took the state by only 2.6 points, and Biden won with a 3-point margin.

As referenced earlier, the comparative data from those four states demonstrate a more significant demographic voter problem that will dog the Republican Party into 2024. Here is the major obstacle using data from the Roper Center from 2004 and 2020:

In 2004, whites composed 77 percent of voters, a share that shrunk to 67 percent by 2020. Bush was reelected in 2004 after winning the white vote 58 to 41 percent over Kerry. But in 2020, Trump lost reelection to Joe Biden even after winning whites 58 to 41 percent — the same percentage Bush won in 2004.

Hence, that 10 percent drop in whites as a share of voters from 2004 to 2020 proved detrimental to Trump. And in 2024, the white percentage will continue shrinking (perhaps by three points), the same decrease from 2016 to 2020, when white voters dipped from 70 to 67 percent.

By comparison, 1984 Roper data show that 86 percent of voters were white when President Reagan won his reelection landslide, winning them 66 to 34 percent over former Vice President Walter Mondale.

While still heavily relying on white voters, the Republican Party continues to lose states that had historically been red — most prominently Georgia and Arizona in 2020. So again, let’s compare both states to Bush’s 2004 benchmark victory to grasp the GOP’s precipitous decline.

Bush won Arizona by 10.5 percentage points. Sixteen years later, Biden eked out a 0.3 percentage point surprise defeat over Trump — who in 2016 had won Arizona by 3.6 percentage points. Thus, in 2024, Arizona catapults to the highest tier of battleground states with its 11-vote Electoral College prize.

Trump, who lost the popular vote in 2016, was elected president because he busted through the triple blue wall by winning an extra 77,744 votes spread across Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — earning 46 electoral votes. Then in 2020, those three states reverted to blue when Biden won with similarly close margins as Trump in 2016.

The Republican Party faces a crisis due to its shrinking white voter base unless it makes commensurate gains among the growing non-white electorate, which totaled 33 percent of voters in 2020 and which Biden won 71 to 26 percent over Trump. That 33 percent will increase in 2024.

Nearly 20 years after he became the last Republican to win the popular and electoral votes, George W. Bush has ironically become an outcast in a Trump-dominated party. GOP voters in 2024 are unlikely to nominate a candidate who can match Bush’s 2004 achievement, which will require a major realignment and rebranding.

2024 will mark 20 years since Republicans last won the popular vote. Can they rebrand in time to stop losing streak? | The Hill

@Clint As you would be aware… Like Canada, Australia is another Commonwealth Nation which relies on the Westminster style of Government… With all the positives… And the negatives…

Australia has a very similar society to Canada… And a major commodities export reliant economy with very similar strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

We are currently Governed by the Australian Labor Party… A leftist rabble of ideologues… More interested in ideals and narratives than the good of the people and the long term prosperity of the nation… Sound familiar…?

Hundreds of Millions of dollars being wasted on vanity project’s that have no baring on the improvement of society… Hospitals, Social Services and Police forces stripped of funding while State Labor Governments spend billions on infrastructure that will be used by ~10% of the population…

“There’s not a dollar of someone else’s that Australian Labor doesn’t want to spend…”

Just like the Trudeau Government, they are hellbent on crushing all fossil fuels for energy generation and the implementation of unsustainable green initiative’s (Climate Taxation) that is driving the cost of living for the average Australian into the stratosphere…

Western Governments across the globe have forgotten what their sole purpose is…

“It’s not to ensure their re-election… It’s to ensure they make a difference…”

Australians have nothing against the United States… We breathe a similar culture, fight the same wars… As Konstantin Kisin said during his recent first visit Downunder. " Australia is a country that looks like America, that is full of British people that aren’t miserable…"

Unfortunately… A few in this thread have no concept of what goes on outside of their Borders…

1 Like

I had to take a moment and laugh at this statement, I would say Australia is a nice country.

Throughout our history we have been involved in wars and conflicts large and small for decades, I won’t go to far back, we can start with Franklin Roosevelt in 1933.

American Wars by President Since World War Two

Since World War Two, the United States has had 15 presidents. They all have dealt with an America at war, dealing with varying degrees of conflict. Most of them, such as President Trump, who took office in January of 2017, or President Biden, who took office in January of 2021, inherited wars begun or left over from their predecessors. Here is a listing of wars and conflicts under each president, beginning with the administration of Franklin Roosevelt in 1933 through the current administration of Joe Biden. As events warrant, new wars and conflicts will be added.

Wars of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1945)

Inherited:

U.S. Occupation of Haiti, which Roosevelt ended in 1933

Initiated:

U.S. involvement in World War Two

Wars of Harry S Truman (1945-1953)Inherited:

World War Two. Truman made the decision to use two atomic bombs on Japan

Initiated/Engaged:

U.S. involvement in the Cold War against the Soviet Union and associated communist states and organizations

U.S. involvement in the Korean War

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

Soviet Occupation of Northern Iran

Greek Civil War (U.S. supplied aid and military advisors to aid Greek government against communist rebels)

Berlin Crisis of 1948 and Berlin Airlift

Communist victory in Chinese Civil War. The U.S. supported the losing Nationalist Chinese side that then moved to the island of Formosa (now Taiwan), when they lost the war to the Communists.

Wars of Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961)

Inherited:

Cold War

U.S. involvement in the Korean War

Initiated/Engaged:

Covert U.S. action in Guatemala and Iran

U.S. military intervention in Lebanon in 1958

Military Intervention in Vietnam (advisors sent in 1955. The U.S had 900 U.S. troops in Vietnam by the end of 1960)

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

Taiwan Straits Crisis of 1954

Hungarian Revolution (Hungarians unsuccessfully rebelled against Soviets in 1956)

Fidel Castro’s victory in Cuban Revolution and his alliance with the Soviets. U.S. begins covert operations against Cuba, including planning for invasion by Cuban exiles.

U2 Spy Plane Shootdownand Crisis (1960)

Wars of John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)

Inherited:

Cold War

Covert Operations against Castro’s Cuba
U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War

Initiated/Engaged:

Increase of American involvement in Vietnam and Laos. By the time of Kennedy’s death in 1963, nearly 16,000 U.S. troops were in Vietnam.

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

Berlin Wall Crisis of 1961

Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba by Cuban Exiles with U.S. aid in 1961 (planning had begun under the Eisenhower Admninistration)

Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962-Nearly led to war with Soviet Union

Wars of Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)

Inherited:

Cold War

U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. By the time Johson left office in January, 1969, over 500,000 U.S. troops were in Vietnam.

Initiated/Engaged:

U.S. Invasion/Intervention in the Dominican Republic in 1965

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

Korean DMZ Conflict. Low-level combat along the Demilitarized Zone separating North and South Korea. This conflict lasted from 1966 to December of 1969. The U.S. suffered 43 dead and 111 wounded.

USS Pueblo Crisis of 1968 North Korea attacked and captured the U.S. Naval ship the Pueblo off the Korean coast.

Six-Day Arab-Israeli War of 1967. The U.S. supported Israel, while the Soviets supported Egypt, Syria, and Iraq

Wars of Richard M. Nixon (1969-1974)

Inherited:

Cold War

U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. During the Johnson Administration, the war escalated to the point that in 1968, more than 500,000 U.S. troops were serving in Vietnam. Nison also sent troops to fight North Vietnamese forces in Cambodia and Laos as part of the Vietnam War.

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

American North Korean Shootdown U.S. Navy EC-121 reconnaissance plane in 1969. The North Korean attack resulted in 31 U.S. servicemembers killed.

1973 Arab-Israeli War. Soviet-supported Arab states attacked Israel. The U.S. supported Israel. Intense U.S. and Soviet support of their allies nearly led to war.

Wars of Gerald R. Ford (1974-1977)

Inherited:

Cold War

U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War

Initiated/Engaged:

Final combat of the Indochina/Vietnam War in May of 1975, with the attempted rescue of the SS. Mayaguez from Cambodian communist rebels.

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

Soviet and Cuban interventions in Africa.

1976 Axe Murder at Panmunjom. North Korean troops kill an American soldier at the truce village of Panmunjom, Korea.

Wars of Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)

Inherited:

Cold War

Initiated/Engaged:

Iran Hostage Crisis

Cold War Crisis/Incidents: Soviet and Cuban interventions in Africa

Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan. After the Soviet invasion of Afghanista, Carter initiated U.S. assistance to the Afghan resistance.

Wars of Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)

Inherited:

Cold War

Ongoing hostility with Iran

Initiated/Engaged:

U.S. Intervention in Lebanon

Covert War on Nicaragua (Contra War)-part of Cold War

Salvadoran Civil War-U.S. provided military assistance and advisors to aid the government of El Salvador against communist rebels, who were supported by Cuba and Nicaragua.

U.S. Invasion of Grenada- part of Cold War. U.S. forces engaged in combat with Cuban troops for the first time in the Cold War

U.S. Conflict with Libya

U.S. Involvement in Iran-Iraq War (Tanker War and Iran-Contra Arms Deals)

Cold War Crisis/Incidents:

Soviet and Cuban interventions in Africa. The U.S. provided both overt and covert assistance to nations and armed groups in Africa opposing Soviet and Cuban interventions in Angola and Ethiopia.

Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan (U.S. actively aids Afghan resistance against Soviets)

Wars of George H.W. Bush (1989-1993)

Inherited:

Cold War-With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Cold War ended in 1991

Ongoing hostility with Iran

Initiated/Engaged:

U.S Invasion of Panama in 1989

Persian Gulf War to liberate Kuwait against Iraq in 1990-1991

No-Fly Zone War in Iraq (U.S. and Britain enforced no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq, while also initiated a virtual military occupation of the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq

U.S. Intervention in Somalia

Wars of Bill Clinton (1993-2001)

Inherited:

Ongoing hostility with Iran

U.S. Intervention in Somalia

Ongoing conflict with Iraq (No-Fly Zone War)

Initiated/Engaged:

U.S. Invasion of Haiti in 1991-Operation Uphold Democracy

Bosnian War (1992-1995)-The U.S. participated, along with NATO, in a war against Bosnian Serbs and Serbia in Bosnia.

Kosovo War of 1999- The U.S. participated, along with NATO, in a war against Serbia in order to facilitate the independence of Kosovo.

1998 Bombings of U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania by al-Qaida terrorists.

U.S. Retaliation against al-Qaida in Sudan and Afghanistan -These incidents are often referred to as the actual start of the U.S. war with al-Qaida and Islamic Jihadist groups. This retaliation was called Operation Infinite Reach.

Wars of George W. Bush (2001-2009)

Inherited:

Ongoing hostility with Iran

No-Fly Zone War against Iraq

Conflict with al-Qaida

Initiated/Engaged:

Hainan Island Incident (2001)–A U.S. Navy EP-3 reconnaissance aircraft operating above the waters of the South China Sea was struck by a Chinese Air Force interceptor jet.

September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks

War in Afghanistan-The U.S invaded Afghanistan to fight al-Qaida and the Taliban

Invasion and Occupation of Iraq

Wars of Barack Obama (2009-2017)

Inherited:

Ongoing hostility with Iran

War in Afghanistan

War in Iraq-The U.S. officially withdrew from Iraq in December of 2011.

Conflict with al-Qaida-includes Drone War against al-Qaida and other Jihadist groups in Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and elsewhere.

Initiated/Engaged:

Libyan War of 2011

War with ISIS-The U.S. military returned to Iraq in 2014 to fight against the Islamic State (ISIS or ISIL). This war also takes place in Syria, Libya, Yemen, and other nations.

U.S. aid to France in Mali War (2014)-U.S. provides air support, logistics, and other aid as France intervenes to stop Jihadist offensive in Mali

U.S. intervention in Joseph Kony conflict-U.S. troops aid Ugandan and other African militaries hunt down insurgent and terrorist Joseph Kony.

U.S. Intervention in Libyan Civil War (2014-Present)-U.S. involvement is primarily directed against Jihadist elements in Libya.

U.S. Intervention in Yemen Civil War -U.S. involvement is primarily directed against Jihadist elements in Yemen.

U.S. Intervention in Somali Civil War U.S. involvement is primarily directed against Jihadist elements in Somalia.

Wars of Donald J. Trump (2017-2021)

Inherited:

Ongoing hostility with Iran. This ongoing conflict escalated sharply in December 2019 and January of 2020, with Iranian-proxy forces (Iraqi Shiite militias) attacking U.S. bases in Iraq, killing American personnel. U.S. responded by killing a Shiite militia leader and a major figure in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Iran responded with missile attacks on two U.S. bases in Iraq, injuring over a hundred American troops.

War in Afghanistan

Wars Against ISIS, al-Qaida and other Islamic Jihadist groups in Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, northern Africa and elsewhere.

American Missile Strike on Syria (April 6, 2017)-In response to the Assad regime’s apparant use of chemical weapons on a civilian target, the April 4 chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun, United States President Donald Trump ordered a retaliatory strike against the Syrian air base at Al Shayrat. See also: American-Syrian Wars.

Wars of Joseph R. Biden (2021-Present)

Inherited:

Ongoing hostility with Iran.

In response to attacks (rockets and drones, primarily) the U.S. has launched retailatory strikes against Iran-backed (i.e. proxies for Iran) on these dates:

February 25, 2021: President Biden ordered retaliatory airstrikes on Iraqi Shiite militia targets located in eastern Syria. This was in response to an attack on February of 2021, when Iranian proxies (again, Iraqi Shiite militias) launched three attacks on American targets inside Iraq. One U.S.-mployed contractor was killed and U.S. troops were injured.

June 27, 2021: President Biden ordered retaliatory airstrikes on Iraqi Shiite militia targets located along the Iraq/Syria border. This was in response to drone attacks on bases in northern Iraq that housed U.S. forces. The two Shiite groups hit were the Kata’ib Hezbollah and Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada militia groups. Iraqi media reported that four militia members died in the attack.

June 28, 2021: In response to the previous day’s airstrikes, militia forces respond with rocket attacks on U.S. troops on the ground in Syria near al-Omar. The U.S. reported no American casualties, and responded with artillery fire at the “rocket-launching platforms.”

War in Afghanistan (President Biden withdrew American forces on August 30, 2021).

Wars Against ISIS, al-Qaida and other Islamic Jihadist groups in Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, northern Africa and elsewhere. This ongoing conflict with the terrorist group includes a successful special forces raid on the leader of ISIS, conducted in February of 2022. American forces attacked the ISIS -held building in the Idlib area of Syria. The ISIS leader, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi, died in the raid on February 3, 2022. Rather than be captured, al-Qurashi blew himself, and his family up. The U.S. forces reported no American casualties.

In addition to the ongoing war with ISIS, U.S. forces have also sporadically been drawn into conflict with the Houthi faction in the Yemeni Civil War. The U.S. under Presidents Obama and Trump supported the Saudi-led coalition fighting the Iran-backed Houthis, though President Biden rescinded that support in 2021. However, in February, 2022, Houthi and allied Shiite Iraqi militias (the True Promise Brigades) conducted missile and drone attacks on targets in the United Arab Emirates (the UAE). The UAE is a member of the anti-Houthi coalition. American anti-missile defense units stationed in the UAE (where the U.S. has military bases), launched Patriot missiles at the incoming missiles. This was the first combat use by the United States of Patriot Missiles since the 1991 Gulf War. Source: Military Times

With the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the United States has increased support for Ukraine, providing weapons, training, money, and economic and political support. It is not out of bounds to say that under President Biden, a new Cold War has developed with Russia. Given Iranian, North Korean, and Chinese support for Russia, the prospects of a new, global cold war are increasing.

Israel-Hamas War:

In October, 2023, the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas attacked Israel in a surprise offensive. President Biden declared American support for Israel in this new war, sending a U.S. Navy carrier group to nearby waters, while promising delivery of weapons and ammunition to Israel. Several American citizens were killed in the Hamas attack, which could also further U.S. involvement.

Since the start of the Israel-Hamas War, American involvment has increased. The U.S. is supplying massive amounts of munitions and equipment to Israel. Also, President Biden ordered a second Carrier Task Force to the region. As expected, Iranian-allied (and most likely Iranian-controlled) Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria have targeted American forces in the region. Also, a U.S. Navy Destroyer interecpted mulitple missiles and drones launched by Yemen’s Houthi regime that were aimed at Israel.

-Oct. 18, 2023-U.S. troops at al-Tanf base in Syria targeted by drones launched by Iran-allied Shiite militia. One drone was shot down, the other hit the base, causing minor injuries.

-Another drone targeted the U.S. base at al-Asad in western Iraq. The drone was shot down. Rockets hit the Baghdad airport, where U.S. and coalition forces are based. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq, an umbrella group of Iranian-backed militias, claimed responsibility for the attacks.

-Oct. 19, 2023–USS Carney, in the northern Red Sea, shot down four cruise missiles and 15 drones over a period of nine hours launched by Houthi forces in Yemen. The attack appeared headed toward Israel.

U.S. retaliatory strikes on militia targets in Syria and Iraq have continued, but attacks on American and Coalition forces continued.

By January, 2024, American forces in Iraq and Syria had incurred dozens of casualties in over 80 attacks by Iran-backed militia forces. In addition, on January 11, 2024, U.S. and UK forces retaliated against Houthi targets in Yemen. Allied airstrikes continued, though Houthi attacks on ships continued.

WAR AND CONFLICTS

The Trumpster throwing some shade over one of the shadowy figures calling the shots in the White House during this O’Biden Administration…

A Stumbling, Mumbling, Bumbling US President Joe Biden instantly mocked Donald Trump about this meme he posted on X…

I’m surprised Joe didn’t tell a story about seeing the last eclipse while riding a train with President Xi across the Francis Scott Key Bridge while talking to that Amtrak conductor Negri…

Biden last saw an eclipse in 1770… He was standing with George Washington at the time…

Unfortunately… A few in this thread have no concept of what goes on outside of their Borders…

All presidents have advisers and policy makers around them, so it’s not difficult

Of course, the president can have an idea such as loan forgiveness and ask his advisers to come up with a plan.

by the late 20th century, major policy functions that used to be performed outside the White House were now integrated into the White House:

Domestic policy development that had been done in the policy shops and by the staffs of departmental secretaries was now dominated by the White House domestic policy staff.

National Security policy advice and planning had moved from the Departments of State and Defense into an expanded National Security Council staff.

Legal advice to the president, which had been dominated by the Department of Justice, was now provided by the White House Counsel and a team of White House lawyers.

Trade policy, which had been developed in departments such as State, Commerce, and Agriculture, was now centralized in the US Trade Representative’s Office in the Executive Office of the President.

Additionally, political functions that had previously been performed by the political parties and in Congress were now located in the White House:

Recruitment of political appointees, which had been dominated by political parties and heavily influenced by members of Congress was now centralized in the Office of Presidential Personnel, with a large staff during transitions and a significant role throughout a presidential administration.

Outreach to interest groups, which had been done by political parties, was now conducted by the Office of Public Liaison in the White House.

Party politics, which had been dominated by the Republican and Democratic National Committees, was now centralized in the White House Office of Political Affairs.

  • Building coalitions in Congress has, since the 1950s, been done by the Office of Legislative Liaison in the White House Office.

There were reasons for these changes, of course; the executive branch is huge, comprising a plethora of conflicting and overlapping bureaucracies, and presidents need a coordinating and integrating capacity to rein in and control policy direction in the executive branch. Presidents now, however, take for granted that these functions are in the realm of the White House staff.

Meanwhile, cabinet secretaries understandably resent “interference” from White House staffers. Presidents fill their cabinets with experienced leaders from around the country. These leaders must have some combination of executive experience, policy expertise, partisan credentials, or personal loyalty to the president. They symbolize presidential priorities, represent demographic groups and marshal the support of the clientele of the department they will be leading.

Once in office, cabinet secretaries are seen as advocates for their policy domain, champions for the workers in their departments, and aggressive seekers of budget resources. Predictably, they want presidential attention for their own policy priorities. In recruiting cabinet secretaries, presidents often tell them that they are essential to the success of the administration, that they will be the primary advisers in their policy areas, and that they will have a reasonable amount of discretion in choosing their political appointees. Recent history, however, shows that presidents seldom can keep these promises.

The reality is that cabinet secretaries’ duties and inclinations often put them on a collision course with White House staffers, who are trying to rein them in and harness them to presidential priorities. As Charles Dawes, the first director of the Bureau of the Budget put it “cabinet secretaries are assistant presidents for spending, and as such are the natural enemies of the president.”

Cabinet secretaries naturally resent being overshadowed by White House staffers, who are usually younger than they are and are often seen as political loyalists rather than policy experts. Staffers have access to the president and seem to impose their personal preferences on the cabinet. President Obama’s cabinet secretaries did not appreciate chief of staff Rahm Emanuel treating them as his “minions.”

To illustrate this dynamic, when President Obama came to office, he initially intended to delegate legal policy on detainees at Guantanamo to his attorney general and friend, Eric Holder. Holder accepted the position with the understanding that he would make legal decisions independently of the White House, though of course the president would have the final say. In delegating some of the key legal decisions regarding detainee policy to Attorney General Holder, President Obama wanted to be seen as not letting politics interfere with legal principles. Obama told Holder to make legal decisions on the merits of the law rather than on political grounds.

Exercising his delegated authority, Holder decided to try some 9/11 terrorist suspects in criminal court rather than by military tribunals, and he chose New York City as the venue. The decision caused a political uproar, with congressional leaders threatening legislation to mandate military commissions at Guantanamo and not in the continental United States. Holder’s decisions reinforced White House staffers’ suspicion that he was not sufficiently sensitive to the president’s political interests. Ultimately, the White House staff, particularly chief of staff Emanuel, convinced Obama that the political repercussions of Holder’s decisions were more important than Holder’s legal judgments and his independence from the White House. Obama’s experiment with delegation foundered at the hands of the White House staff, illustrating the imperative of centralized White House control of policy.

Thus President Obama continued the 20th century trend of centralizing control in the White House staff, ensuring the frustration of cabinet secretaries. But in the modern presidency, coordination of administration policy from the president’s perspective is essential. The challenge is to maintain a healthy balance between too much centralization and the opposite problem of lack of coordination of policy making and implementation in departments and agencies.

@SmallPaul “All presidents have advisers and policy makers around them, so it’s not difficult…”

The difference is who’s leading who… Biden just does whatever the staff tells him…

The current White House is a Weekend at Bernie’s situation? Biden is literally incapable of coming up with his own words or making decisions and they are writing everything for him?

US President Joe Biden has Handlers and Carers… Not Advisors and Policy Makers…

BTW Stop posting great swathes of cut and past text… No one in this forum is going to read such waffle… It proves beyond doubt you have no idea how to articulate an intelligent response…