For all those who have their undies in a bundle over Biden's comment about Putin must enjoy watching people being killed and cities being flattened. I'm not sure it was a "gaffe" but our Presidents honest feeling and if so good for him. What Putin is doing is so unnecessary but for whatever reason he continues. Thank heavens his army is …
For all those who have their undies in a bundle over Biden's comment about Putin must enjoy watching people being killed and cities being flattened. I'm not sure it was a "gaffe" but our Presidents honest feeling and if so good for him. What Putin is doing is so unnecessary but for whatever reason he continues. Thank heavens his army is poorly trained or Ukraine might already belong to Russia. I grew up during WWII so I've seen this before, it wasn't pleasant then and it's less so now.
Believe it or not, you're not the only person who's familiar with the history of WW2. In any case, if Biden isn't ready to go to war to achieve an aim like regime change in Russia, he shouldn't raise expectations about it. Perhaps you recall that Bush 41 urged the Iraqi Shias to rebel against Saddam Hussein, whom he'd just let off the hook, and they were slaughtered for their troubles. It is not a President's job to react viscerally in public to events he's made no commitment to affecting.
Who said anything about "regime change"? You are making a giant leap from the statement that "That man cannot remain in power" to some threat of war against Russia. Biden said, "that man" not "that regime." Last time I looked at the dictionary, a "man" was not a "regime."
For all those who have their undies in a bundle over Biden's comment about Putin must enjoy watching people being killed and cities being flattened. I'm not sure it was a "gaffe" but our Presidents honest feeling and if so good for him. What Putin is doing is so unnecessary but for whatever reason he continues. Thank heavens his army is poorly trained or Ukraine might already belong to Russia. I grew up during WWII so I've seen this before, it wasn't pleasant then and it's less so now.
Believe it or not, you're not the only person who's familiar with the history of WW2. In any case, if Biden isn't ready to go to war to achieve an aim like regime change in Russia, he shouldn't raise expectations about it. Perhaps you recall that Bush 41 urged the Iraqi Shias to rebel against Saddam Hussein, whom he'd just let off the hook, and they were slaughtered for their troubles. It is not a President's job to react viscerally in public to events he's made no commitment to affecting.
Who said anything about "regime change"? You are making a giant leap from the statement that "That man cannot remain in power" to some threat of war against Russia. Biden said, "that man" not "that regime." Last time I looked at the dictionary, a "man" was not a "regime."
That's disingenious. It's like saying "Hitler cannot remain in power" and then insisting you'd be fine with Himmler.