Letters to the Editor
-
huh
I was totally impressed by Biden in this article... and then I got to the end and realized Biden never said what he would actually *do* about anything.
So foreign policy is complicated and actions taken with one country have ramifications with many others. No big surprise there. Where would Biden lead us with his understanding of the situation?
-
Rebecca
Go to planforiraq.com or www.joebiden.com
His plans are laid out there. he was the only candidate to come out with a plan for Pakistan following Musharaff's call to him.
He is the only one with a plan for iraq which got 75 votes in the US Senate.
He is the only statesman in the race.
-
Unaffordable foreign policy
I would have picked a better title, if just to get folks to read this interview. If affirmatively entitled "Biden instructs Clinton, Obama on foreign policy" instead of some introspective angle, people might have actually read this piece. Most people don't actually do more than size up the wardrobe of these candidates, and that's why no one cares about Joe Biden. He is seen as passe by the media elite, a bit of a talker with not enough chiseled features to be president, perhaps. I remember watching how engaged he was in the senate confirmation committees for Robert Bork years ago; he's the genuine article for those who lean this way.
The foreign policy differences between Clinton and George Bush are slight, as Biden points out. What I would like to ask Biden to add to this argument is the cost of these engagements. We spend $500B+ annually on foreign activities, while we read that this war may cost $1.6T all in, just measured in today's dollars. We can't afford Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton. Our childen's inheritance will be in the form of a debt mountain to China and the Middle East, a devalued and disrespected currency, and world hatred for the United States.
-
One of the few places
Salon is one of the few places that seems to be covering all the candidates and not just the "top three". Odd, that the "top two - Hillary and Obama" are always the last 2 in the local straw polls with Kucinch, Edwards, and Biden leading the way. Also, this nonsense that Hillary is spouting that just because she was the wife of a president she has foreign policy experience - that's like Houdini's wife claiming to be the best magician in the world because she was once married to him. Some of our best president's had very limited executive or foreign policy experience (e.g. Lincoln, Washington, Roosevelt, Kennedy, etc) but they had vision and the ability to carry that out without destroying their present or the future of this great nation. We need to know more about the democratic candidates so that we're not being fooled by faux question and answer sessions on CNN.
-
He's right but so what
It's a puzzle that Biden can articulate the failures of the other candidates (and US foreign policy in general) but still be so ineffective. For years I watched him pontificate, make speeches posing as questions, look thoughtful and do nothing. If we could cross breed him with Byrd we might get something worth having. In the end just another pompous gasbag.
-
For John, Des Moines
Thanks for the links, John (and welcome to Salon premium. I see this is the first letter Salon shows you to have posted). They were very helpful to me and informative not only in themselves but also the several additional links (for information) they provided. Sorry to be so word-repetitive, but I _am_ starved for spinless information.
"While I'm at it," thanks, too to Salon and Walter Shapiro. This is the first thing I've read today that gave me a smidge of hope of the possibility of finding sane and substantive discussions of politics and international relations online. Two days (it's two minutes before midnight, Tuesday right now) before Turkey Day! ["Of all things....." ;-)].
salonmarte
-
Reads Like A Job Application
Here's my take away from this article: Biden knows he's got a very small chance of actually getting the nomination, much less winning, but he's got a national platform to build a case for being Secretary of State. Note how careful he is to not talk bad about the front runners, even though he's got no problem taking digs at the others (I read 'God bless him' as a variation of the Southern coded slam 'bless his heart').
If this is the case, I would hope that the other candidates have him and Hagel on a very short list. It'd be refreshing to have someone represent us in world affairs that isn't still fixated on the Cold War.
-
Its a popularity contest
If anyone really cared about serious issues Joe Biden would be a top contender for the nomination.
Geoerge W Bush was in no way qualified to hold the office of President. He was elected purely for cosmetic reasons. Its a shame people haven't learned a valuable lesson in these past years.
-
Biden and Foreign policy
I've been a closet Biden fan for years, whether as a presidential candidate or Senator. The older I get the more I appreciate a long track record to look at, involving the candidate's economic, ideological, cultural and psychological record. My rule #1: the issues in the campaign are never the issues of the subsequent administration. Remember 2000? ANWAR and the lockbox on Social Security were all we heard about from anybody.
Don't bother to fault anybody for being coy about their foreign policy if elected. All these statements become inoperative in January 2009. Look at their past, especially their susceptibility to neo-con values and to K Street. Then cross your fingers, offer a little prayer, and vote.
-
Biden isn't any better then the rest of them.
The whole "peace" wing crap simply shows that he is yet another Democrat who thinks the key to success is to ignore the people who were right about Iraq in the first place.
Further, his statements on the inter-related nature of foreign policy isn't actually a policy, its just how the world works and is a dodge for coming up with anything concrete on specific cases.
If you withdraw will things get better? No, but at least you won't be saddled with paying to occupy the place as things deteriorate anyway.
America's presence in Iraq is not successfully preventing a regional war (As the Turkish government can attest) and your treasury is being spent on something meaningless when what you really need is to spend more money on your internal problems.
Much as America's policies with other countries are inter-related so your policies at home influence your choices abroad. You do not have the money to continue the Iraq war, and that is a situation which is only going to get worse.
Withdrawal, as painful as it is going to be is not a choice born of not knowing what is going on in that region, it is a choice based on what is going on with the treasury.