Hey, Wasn’t Joe Biden Supposed to be Obama’s Foreign Policy Expert?

When President Barack Hussein Obama picked Joe Biden to be his number two man, we were all told that it was because good ol’ Joe was the U.S. Senate’s “expert” on foreign policy. He was supposed to act as Obama’s right hand man in an area that Obama had no experience whatsoever. So, with disaster after disaster in foreign policy, it behooves us to ask, where is Joe Biden?

Of course, we all know that Biden has been wrong on every stance he’s ever taken on foreign policy both as a Senator and as Vice President. He has been so consistently wrong that even a member of Obama’s own administration has said Biden is an utter failure on reading foreign policy.

In his recent book, former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that Biden has been wrong about “nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

It was a stark description that even the left-leaning PolitiFact said was “mostly true.”

Gates’ isn’t a lone voice, naturally. Among many others Charles Krautammer also slammed this useless VP as a foreign policy dunce.

In 2012, Krauthammer said this:

The Vice President has been over the last 30 years holds the American record for wrong on the most issues in foreign affairs ever. And the list starts with the nuclear freeze in the early ’80s against Thatcher and Reagan and Cole which is one of the follies of the era. He supported it. He was against aid to the Nicaraguan Contras which in the end brought democracy and ended the Sandinista rule at the time. He was against Reagan’s expansion of the defense budget which bankrupted the Soviet Union and led to the end of the Soviet Empire. He was against Reagan on Strategic Defenses, which is the big advantage that we have now in the missile age.

And look at where he was on Iraq. He opposed the first Iraq War, the Gulf War that liberated Kuwait that everybody agrees was a good thing. He supported the Iraq War which he, not I, which he says was a terrible mistake. And then when the surge happened, he opposed the surge in Iraq which rescued a losing war and ended with our leaving with our heads held high and some promise in the future.

All that being said, the important question on the table is… where is sheriff Joe?

I am not the only one wondering. McClatchy just asked that question, though it didn’t come to the right conclusion, naturally.

For McClatchy, Anita Kumar noted that when Iraq exploded (well, this time, anyway) Biden was on a swing through Central and South America. Obviously no one in the administration was paying any attention to policy in Iraq and the ISIS attacks were a complete surprise to Obama.

But McClatchjy also points out that, “Once the public face of the U.S. involvement in Iraq, Biden is no longer the administration’s most visible person on Iraq policy, prompting some confusion about who is leading the U.S. efforts there.”

Kumar got all that right, of course. But what she missed is the truth that Biden has never had any part in Obama’s foreign policy at all. The mess the world is in, Russian aggression, Chinese arrogance and expansion, the growth of terror, the fall of Iraq and Afghanistan, all of this is Obama’s fault.

Sheriff Joe had no part in any of it. He never has. Just as he was thought of as the joke of the Senate and ignored on that basis, he is now a chair-warmer as VP and has no part at all in Obama’s foreign policy. Zero, zip, nada.

Now, this isn’t to say that Joe would have done it better. As we know, Biden’s ideas on foreign policy are at least as disastrous as Obama’s. But the whole point, here, is that sheriff Joe is yet another Obama smoke screen, another Obama lie. Obama claimed he chose Joe because Biden was an “expert” in foreign policy. But that was just another public lie. Obama never intended to rely on Biden for anything and never has.Biden was destined to be an invisible man to this administration.

This mess is all Obama’s fault. Joe is as useless as teats on a bull, granted, but he isn’t to blame for creating a more dangerous world for our country. Biden would have done no better, mind you, but he is free of any blame this time.

Are The Religious More Tolerant Than Social Scientists?
Liberal Mike Malloy's Anti-Gun Hysteria Says He'll Make False Reports to Police, Advocates Murder
  • jim_m

    Biden would be the expert except that we already know that obama is because obama has already told us:

    “I think I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,”
    Obama told him. “I know more about policies on any particular issue
    than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m gonna
    think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

    It’s hard to be humble when you’re perfect in every way. The sad part is that I can see obama singing this without any sense of irony. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCyYuLQ7_Ws

  • Commander_Chico

    How about we tend to our own business, sell things, buy things, and not try to control other countries? Maybe things would go better for us.

    Every fucking time the USA has tried to control another country in the last 13 years, it’s blown up in our faces. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine.

    • And every time we pretend we can just mind our own business and people will leave us alone, someone flies an airliner into our buildings.

      Bonus points if you can tell us how we tried to “control” the Ukraine? Clinton and Obama did both guarantee to protect them against outside aggression. (Like the Russians) How’d that work out for them?

      • Commander_Chico

        We were not “minding our business” before 9/11.

        As for Ukraine, did you listen to the phone call between Nuland and Pyatt? If you don’t know who they are right now, you have no business discussing the issue.

        • jim_m

          I thought that if someone hadn’t served that they had no business commenting or holding an opinion. So which is it you fascist dumbass?

          • Commander_Chico


          • Jwb10001

            So since you’ve never been a part of the oligarchy I expect you to shut up about it.

          • Thus spake the soi disant “cognoscenti veteran” crapmeister.

          • Retired military

            You have the fools covered all by yourself.

          • And the Damn Fools too, for that matter.

        • Chico means “boy”. What? “Infant” was taken?? Go back and play with your dolls and leave politics to the adults.

          • Commander_Chico

            Guess you didn’t know who Nuland and Pyatt are.

      • scottsgirl

        WE WERE WARNED ABOUT 9/11 yet Condi and Georgie and the Dick IGNORED the warnings.

        • There were numerous indicators (not the same thing as a warning) which the Gorelick “Wall” prevented the intelligence and law enforcement communities from jointly seeing the full picture.


        • Jwb10001

          So in your mind the plot and the warnings all started on Jan 20, 2011? No chance that Bill Clinton had any briefings that indicated AQ was pissed at us and might try to attack us? The world of terrorism started with GWB before that everything was sunshine and lollipops.

        • jim_m

          Are you really that much of a tool? In Congressional hearings after 9/11 it was revealed that all the intel necessary to stop 9/11 was known during Clinton’s admin. But as others have already pointed out, democrat incompetence had dictated that intelligence agencies could not communicate with one another and therefore they never put the pieces together.

          9/11 is partly a story of a complete collapse of the intel structure. That collapse is due almost exclusively to the dems during the Clinton admin.

          I find it hysterical that assholes like you screech about how 9/11 was Bush’s fault because he had been President for almost 9 months and should have been able to stop it. Yet somehow obama has been President for 5.5 years and he can’t do a God damned thing because of Bush.

          Do you ever listen to the Bullshit you spew? Or are you just so much of a racist gasbag that you think that a black President can’t do in 5.5 years what a white man should have been able to in under 9 months?

        • EricSteel

          Even if George W. Bush had put out a BOLO list naming every one of the hijackers the Left would have gone apeshit that he was profiling Muslims.

    • jim_m

      Libya and Syria blew up precisely because we did not get involved and the level of how much or when or whether we would involve ourselves was so muddles by Dear Leader that it made the US look weak and ineffective. Worse than getting involved is looking weak and incompetent. obama excels in looking weak and incompetent.

      I see how badly it turned out for S Korea. As well as for Germany, Italy and Japan. The Philippinesturned out OK too.

      Trust Chico to always hate America first.

      • Commander_Chico

        Yes, I am sure you would be OK with 4000+ American deaths in Libya and Syria by getting “involved” even more.

        Have you been to the Philippines? Corrupt as hell and crappy infrastructure because US installed family mafias going back 100 years steal everything.

        • Tell us crapmeister, which former colony of Span does not suffer from rampant nepotism?

          • Commander_Chico

            Right, blame the Spanish.

          • jim_m

            Heck, if you can blame Bush for things that happen today that he isn’t responsible for, what rational limit is there to going into the past and blaming someone else? Once you establish blame shifting as a legitimate argument then there really is no limit to who you can blame.

            It’s pretty damned ironic hearing you bitch and moan about someone else blame shifting. We have enumerated all of your blame shifting BS, you do it so often.

          • We’ll take it that you cannot, because all of them do indeed. The common element being?

        • jim_m

          I’d be happier if you were one of them.

          • Commander_Chico

            That’s a mean thing to say, speaks to your character.

          • The world would be a better place.

          • Commander_Chico

            We know you’re stewing in your own bile.

          • Like most of what you and your hemorrhoid know…

    • Worked so well in the 1930s, too. Isolationism is SUCH a wonderful idea, it’s time for a replay!

      Shit, we’re already in a depression – why not?

      • jim_m

        Chico is looking forward to a second Holocaust

        • I don’t think he is. I just think he doesn’t much give a shit about how the US was a stabilizing factor worldwide.

          It’s easy to hate the local cop, especially if you think he’s a bully. But the cops have to do a lot of jobs that we don’t think about (or want to think about) – like the one who got called to my brother’s apartment five days after he’d passed away because of the smell. I… never met the man, but I respect him for doing a job that I would never have wanted to do.

          You can hate the cop who gave you a ticket, or arrested you, but you’re going to want the police there when the shit hits the fan.

          Internationally, we’re seeing what happens when the metaphorical cop withdraws his presence, and I don’t think it’s going to settle down anytime soon.

          • Commander_Chico

            We’re not stabilizing, we’re destabilizing. Certainly did not stabilize Iraq, Libya, Syria or the Ukraine – in all cases US action led to debacles, disorder and a lot of people getting killed.

            If the USA is a cop, he’s either like Harvey Keitel in “Bad Lieutenant,” or Barney Fife.

            Stop drinking the MSM Koolaid.


          • You’re right – we’re a destabilizing influence. Other countries now know that no matter what we say now, in one or two administrations our promises won’t be worth a bucket of warm shit.
            Because political advantage at home is FAR more important than any stability our promises might provide.

          • That’s been true since at least 1975.

          • Commander_Chico

            Good analogy. ARVN did not fight, the Iraqi army won’t fight. 10,000 chased away by 800 in Mosul. Pathetic.

          • The ARVN fought harder than you ever have or will.

          • Paul Hooson

            That was unbelievable cowardice in Iraq. – During Vietnam, Ralph “Sonny” Barger, founder of the Oakland Chapter of the Hells Angels MC offered to have a private army of bike club irregular soldiers go behind enemy lines in North Vietnam, much like the Viet Cong were doing and raise havoc in a guerrilla war to undermine the army of the North, with a small tough as nails irregular army. But, President Johnson turned down the idea, worried about some being taken prisoner or responsibility for acts of warfare that went wrong. But, it was an interesting offer from a small tough group of patriots to stand up to North Vietnam with a guerrilla force like this. Ralph “Sonny” Barger had actually once joined the U.S. Army at the age of 16, but was later discharged when it was discovered that he was underage.

            Even with my nightclub, friends of mine associated with the Hells Angels and Gypsy Jokers have been good allies here, helping with security or other matters, and keeping order in a neighborhood in which different sects of the Cripps, Bloods, and other ethnic gangs are quite strong and one gang related murder took place here at the front door some years ago. Six different ethnic gangs are strong in this area, but friends of mine in the bike community helped to keep the club safe for everyone, and an environment of mutual respectfulness for everyone. Where police and other regular elements fail, bike community guys stepped up and kept the peace. In Vietnam, I only wonder what this small army could have achieved who were willing to stand up to the entire North Vietnamese Army.

          • Commander_Chico

            That’s always been true. Look up Korea, Japan and Teddy Roosevelt.

            There are no permanent friends among nations anyways, only permanent interests.

      • Commander_Chico

        Yes, because every foreign leader who won’t kiss our ass is HITLER. Saddam, Assad, Ghadaffi, Putin, Madero, Roubani – all Hitlers.

        • jim_m

          So is that a defense of Hitler? Otherwise it certainly explains why the left loves our enemies. They certainly love their anti-semites.

          • Commander_Chico

            You are obsessed about the Jews and anti-semitism.

          • Jwb10001

            Again, you of all people should just not go there, your obsessions are legend around here. Oligarchy, nonsensical conspiracy theories, constant chickenhawk/war monger name calling, flipping out of VDH/Cheney/Bush/Neo Cons, you’re so predictable that about all one can do is point and laugh. Chico and his 6 standard replies to any criticism of Obama.

          • Commander_Chico

            Ah, VDH, Chickenhawk Supremo. Had not thought about him in awhile.

          • jim_m

            Had not thought about him in awhile.

            FIFY. Little of what you put out here is anything that you think. You just parrot lefty talking points and serially repeat the same 5 excuses that you always have for leftist incompetence and corruption.

          • Retired military

            Your option D is “DA JOOOS”

        • Right. (Snicker.)

          As the saying goes, “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.” (Misattributed to Trotsky, but that’s as may be.)

          Ignoring the world and refusing to interact with it doesn’t make it go away.

          • Commander_Chico

            How about we try to interact with the world with less threats and manipulation? Use trade and culture, not military and covert interventions.

            All of the interventions I mentioned have ended up harming the USA. America flails around fucking up places like Syria and the Ukraine in a quest for hegemony.

            World War I is as much of a lesson as World War II, but people have forgotten it.

          • jim_m

            How about we use both just as every nation and culture has done before us for thousands of years?

            And you are now holding up both WWI and WWII as failures of intervention? You really are a loony.

          • Commander_Chico

            WW I was a totally unnecessary war. The USA should have stayed out of it. If Germany had won, they’d have been no WW II, and a stable German monarchy dominant in Europe. Guess what? The Germans dominate Europe now.

          • jim_m

            That comment shows a tremendous ignorance about WWI and Europe.

          • Commander_Chico

            It’s not just my idea – Niall Ferguson said the same thing in The Pity of War.

          • jim_m

            Written in just 5 months start to finish, including research, suggests that Mr Ferguson’s conclusions were predetermined and not the result of academic research and careful consideration. Ferguson, in attempting to discredit other scholars who claim that Germany rushed into war, makes the same mistake by accusing Great Britain of the same. His book appears at a glance to be ideologically skewed and the fact that it took almost no time to write and research supports that view (even if he had his RA’s at Harvard do most of the work for him).

            Claims that X nation should have stayed out of WWI are grossly ignorant in their lack of understanding of alliances and nationalism at the beginning of the 20th century. Yes, the war was avoidable for the reasons that it started, but in some ways it was inevitable with the rise of nationalism, the decline of monarchies and the tension between the people’s desire for self rule and the ruling class’s desire for the status quo.

          • Commander_Chico

            Who are you copying and pasting from? A babbling idiot?

            Can you respond substantively or do you just make personal attacks on me and Ferguson?

          • He should be ignoring you.

          • jim_m

            I’m always criticizing you. Why wouldn’t I criticize a troother who thinks that Bush was complicit in 9/11 and that Cheney was responsible for the Anthrax attacks?

            I made a general criticism of Ferguson’s book that it does not seem that he spent any time actually researching and coming to a conclusion, but rather made a conclusion and then dug up whatever he needed to support that conclusion. I also pointed out that in criticizing what many other scholars have concluded he made a similar error. I don’t think that you can lay blame for WWI on any one nation like he does and you do.

            There were many social forces acting at that time and my belief was that this war was inevitable. There may have been ways to make it less bloody, but such an upheaval was inevitable. Even had Germany won there would have been continued unrest because the old fashioned establishment of the royal houses was doomed. Had Germany won you would have had a short lived continuance of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and of the German Empire, but these were doomed. Neither could reform themselves fast enough to suit the public. Revolution was inevitable.

            In a similar way violent conflict is inevitable in the middle east. islamic fascism must be either put down or succumbed to. You can pretend that there is some way out of conflict but human history demonstrates that there is no such thing,

          • To paraphrase the Master, you were …heaping scorn on an incexcusably siilly idea, a practice one should always follow.

          • Commander_Chico

            If it was all “inevitable” why did the USA have to get involved?

            You left out the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and its devouring by European colonialists. That worked out well, didn’t it?

            You have not given a single reason why the USA had to fight in that war.

          • jim_m

            The US did not get involved until after it was started. Ask Woodrow Wilson, he’s a progressive, he believes in all the bullshit you do. He got us involved. It was the fault of the dems.

          • Commander_Chico

            So now you’re switching and saying the USA getting involved in WW I was a bad thing and the democrats did it?

            Rich. You have the attention span of a fruit fly.

          • jim_m

            No I’m not saying whether it was good or bad. I’m saying that as a matter of Historical fact it was the dems that got us into the war.

            If you read what I said, I have stated that such a violent upheaval was inevitable, that German victory would have only postponed further revolution in Europe, and that monarchy was done in Europe so a German victory would have been pointless.

            But I never said that US involvement was either good or bad.

          • Commander_Chico

            So you are wishy-washy, don’t have an opinion for something you were for a few comments ago.

            Monarchy is not dead if you consider constitutional monarchs. Let’s see: the UK, Spain, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Monaco.

            Maybe the difference between evolutionary change to a constitutional monarchy in Germany and revolutionary change to a republic because of WW I cost what, 50 million dead?

          • jim_m

            I never expressed an opinion. You inferred one that I never made.

            I was speaking of monarchy and not a figurehead constitutional monarchy.

            WWII was 60 M dead between combatants and civilians. WWI was “only” 17 M. You can’t even get your history straight because you are too busy being a dumbass ideologue.

          • Jwb10001

            How would you know a substantive response? Your idea of substance is crap written on a hat.

          • jim_m

            Can you respond substantively…?

            I did:

            1) I discussed how Ferguson’s book was researched and written in a remarkably short time suggesting that its conclusions were reached prior to its beginning.

            2) I pointed out that he makes the same argument that he criticizes other authors for making, but simply blames a different nation.

            3) I suggested that due to the short time to produce the book and the issues I described in #1 that the book may be ideologically skewed.

            The fact that you are obviously too ignorant or your brain too fried on drugs to follow a plain argument such as I laid out above serves to explain why it is that you are so ignorant that you take hats for sale on the internet as cogent arguments.

          • Commander_Chico

            That says nothing about the validity of the arguments he made.

            I just don’t think your mind is structured to argue from facts and logic. You argue like a woman, all personal and emotional.

          • jim_m

            Yes, it does. If you are too dim to understand what I just wrote I am not going to bother trying to explain it further. Go sober your ass up.

            You argue like a bigot making bigoted comments in nearly every post you make.

          • Commander_Chico

            Let me spell it out for you, take you to logic school:

            1) I discussed how Ferguson’s book was researched and written in a remarkably short time suggesting that its conclusions were reached prior to its beginning.

            So what? Does not mean he’s not right. If the evidence is in plain sight, don’t need a five year investigation.

            2) I pointed out that he makes the same argument that he criticizes other authors for making, but simply blames a different nation.

            Again, does not make any difference. Maybe he’s blaming the right nation.

            3) I suggested that due to the short time to produce the book and the issues I described in #1 that the book may be ideologically skewed.

            “I suggested . . . may be.” This is a meaningless statement and also does not speak to the facts of Ferguson’s argument, which was about the value of fighting WW I.

          • jim_m

            Thank you for making my point for me. You claimed that I did not make any comments of substance. The fact that you could respond to my comment point by point demonstrates that I indeed did make a substantive comment. I never expected you to agree with me. Your agreement is not the definition of whether or not someone makes a substantive argument.

            My point was that his book and conclusions were suspect by the virtue of how it was produced. You argue that it doesn’t matter how he made the book ans that as long as you agree with it it is therefor correct. My point was that the way the book was made suggested that the conclusions were preordained and that they were ideologically driven and not from the evidence. You have offered nothing to suggest that I am wrong only that you believe that an argument from a solely ideological perspective is every bit as valid as one from actual evidence.

            The fact that you resort to ad hominem attacks(saying that I argue like a girl) with absolutely no substance yourself shows how shallow your intellect is.

          • Commander_Chico

            Are you really a man?

            A man would have made an argument talking about the reasons why Germany had to be fought in WW I, and thus why Ferguson and I were wrong.

            That is the substantive argument.

          • Who the fuck told YOU what men do?

          • jim_m

            God are you a pussy. Now you are whining that I am not going to argue about what you want to argue about.

            Sorry commander wing nut. I am my own person. Unlike you I actually lead my own life and make my own decisions.

          • No end to your vices…

          • Retired military

            He Most definitely did NOT copy and paste from YOU

  • Ironically, if he runs for Pres in 2016, he will have to bear the burden of all of Obama’s failed policies as if they were his own.

  • Brucehenry

    Biden said in 2007 that Iraq would be better off as 3 states, one Sunni Arab, one Shia, and one Kurdish. He was ridiculed for it but if it had been done in an orderly manner many thousands of lives may have been saved and gas might be 3 bucks or less per gallon.

    It’s gonna wind up as 3 states eventually. Whether in a year, 10 years, or 30 years. The question is how much death and misery will ensue first, as a result of trying to stop the partition.

    • jim_m

      Yes but we are getting 3 states as a result of the failure of obama’s policy. What you are advocating is that we should accept failure as the inevitable result. While I agree that with obama in charge, failure is the inevitable result, I disagree with you that we should be satisfied with it.

      • Brucehenry

        I am suggesting that 3 states would be the natural order of things and that Biden’s suggestion should have been taken seriously back then.

        It will only be viewed as a failure because it wasn’t done without us being forced to agree to it by events. It could have been done at a peace conference instead of on a battlefield.

        I know that wouldn’t slake neocon bloodlust, so the idea was dismissed at the time. But it was a good idea. And still is.

        • jim_m

          BIden was ignored back then because his suggestion was born of panic and a desire for the US to lose. At the time of his suggestion you would have created a client state to Iran, a Kurdish state fomenting civil war in Turkey and a US client state (which obama would have subsequently abandoned creating civil war in Iraq). It is still arguably worse than what we had. And remember, his suggestion was pre-surge and after the surge we had a stable situation until obama fucked it up.

          Yes, there is a legit argument for a Kurdish state but not under those terms.

          This was never about any bloodlust. Go peddle your lies elsewhere. It was about achieving a stable permanent situation and we could have had that except the left is too intent on cutting and running, betraying our allies and creating failure for the US. DOn’t deny it, because the left has been in favor of a US failure from the start. Just look at how everything was about a quagmire in the middle east right up until when obama was elected and now, even though the situation is far worse than it was in Dec 2008, there is never any discussion about it.

          Anti-American a–holes, each and every one of you.

          • Brucehenry

            You’re hallucinating and being vitriolic again, and I’m not in the mood right now. Maybe I’ll check back later after someone gives you your Thorazine, brings you down from the Microdot.

          • jim_m

            I am correct that Biden’s suggestion was pre-surge, that it would have resulted under those circumstances in a more unstable situation, not less, and that after the surge we had a far better situation.

            I am also correct that the left has always desired failure for the US. There is no arguing that groups desiring the US to lose in the ME are almost exclusively from the left. It is also correct that once obama was elected anti-war news virtually disappeared overnight.

            It is also correct that had we committed to staying the course and doing the hard part of winning the post war effort that we would have had a better situation than we have today. Every victory where you depose the enemy government requires that you stay behind and establish the new government. That is not done in a year or two. It is not done by publicly declaring when you are going to leave, thus giving your enemies a clear timeline on how long they need to wait before they act.

            What is also correct is that leftists are historically ignorant jerks guided by ideology alone, filled with anti-American bias and desire for the US to appear weak and impotent on the international stage. The left has for decades now opposed the US in asserting its national interests anywhere in the world (including at home where the left refuses to secure the borders, tries to tear down the rule of law and is working to destroy the public’s confidence in the ballot box).

            Finally, what is correct is that I am only filled with vitriol against hate America first lefties like you.

          • Brucehenry

            You are correct the suggestion was pre-surge. Everything else you wrote in your diatribe is part of your permanent acid trip.

            You have an insane need to blame Obama personally, and “the left” in general, for all of the world’s ills from war to migraine headaches. One track mind. One trick pony. Alternate, revised history of everything from fascism to the French and Indian Wars. Moronic paranoid fever dreams.


          • jim_m

            So you deny that the creation of a Kurdish state would result in the increased possibility of Kurdish insurrection in Turkey, when that is already happening in Turkey and one of the reasons that this was rejected was because Turkey strenuously objected to it.

            Yeah, I blame obama for forsaking our allies, for insulting them and betraying them. These are all true. He has dramatically diminished our stature on the world stage. This is true as well. What you seem to be objecting to is not that these things are true but that I put the blame where it belongs.

          • Brucehenry

            That’s what it seems like to you I’m sure.

            Read the link

          • jim_m

            As soon as I saw that it said “neo-con” and “cheney” I knew it to be a load of bullshit because the only people still going on about Cheney are idiots like you and Chico who claim that Cheney was involved in the Anthrax attacks. I’m glad to see that you align with your buddy on that.

          • Brucehenry

            You’ll never change, will you? you know I never endorsed the far-fetched conspiracy theory Chico claims. Dishonest as ever.

            The point of the link was to ask why anyone takes guys like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Kristol, Wolfowitz et all seriously NOW, given that they have been spectacularly and demonstrably wrong for 12 years.

            And by extension YOU have been wrong for at least that long, in regard to the Middle East.

          • jim_m

            I’m saying that like Chico you are jumping to this BS line that it’s Cheney’s fault. Stop blame shifting and take responsibility.

          • Everyone but the hemorrhoid knows that Biden was taking credit on the part of 0bama for having won in Iraq. In truth, Bush and his team (including Cheney) won the war, and 0bama and his team pissed away the peace.

          • jim_m

            Not only that. Bruce would have claimed all the success in Iraq for obama and he knows that is true. But now that it has gone south he wants to blame Bush and Cheney, and he finds all sorts of reasons to excuse Biden’s claims.

          • About what one would expect from the hemorrhoid depending from the anus which is chicka.

          • Commander_Chico

            Not very far-fetched if you consider the circumstantial evidence – for example the Niger uranium forgeries and the idea to provoke Saddam into shooting down one of our own planes painted with UN markings.


          • Right on cue, the anus from which brucehemorrhoid depends…

          • Brucehenry

            Since any mention of Cheney sends you around the bend, apparently:


          • brucehemorrhoid is projecting [yet] again…

          • Projects the brucehemorrhoid very much indeed.

    • Jwb10001

      Biden also said Iraq would be one of Obama’s shinning accomplishments in foreign policy. I suspect ole Joe don’t know what he’s saying when he’s saying it.

      • jim_m

        Bruce has selective acceptance of the proof of Biden’s genius. When he likes what Biden says it is pure genius. When he doesn’t he pretends that Biden never said it.

        • Brucehenry

          And guys like Cheney, Wolfowitz and Kristol claimed that the US would be greeted as liberators (we weren’t), that the war would pay for itself or cost less than $50B (it has so far cost at least $1T and, when you count the cost of caring for the tens of thousands of US wounded it will cost much much more), and that “democracy” would result from deposing Saddam. Yet you insist they were correct.

          “Iraq” was an invention of Sykes-Picot in the 1920s. Its borders were drawn for the convenience of the imperialist powers Britain and France. It could never be held together except through brutal, terrifying dictatorship like that of the Baathists. It WILL eventually wind up as three separate states, whether de jure or de facto (as is the case with Kurdistan now).

          And again with the dishonesty. Saying someone had a good idea in 2007 doesn’t make him a genius, and I never said it did. A good idea is a good idea, and Biden had a good one. All of Cheney’s ideas were always wrong and wrongheaded, based on arrogance and ignorance.

          • Jwb10001

            So 2 wrongs make a right. Aren’t you the guy that complains at us about this tactic?

          • Only when the shoe is not upon his foot.

          • jim_m

            That only applies to conservatives. For a lefty like Bruce it is always a sufficient excuse if he can find someone somewhere at sometime that did something wrong. All leftist immoralities and illegalities are excused on this basis.

          • Brucehenry

            How could anyone possibly read that meaning into my comment?

            Biden had at least one good idea. By contrast, Cheney and Kristol and their neocon friends wouldn’t know a good idea if it hit them with a shovel.

            And worse, they can’t recognize a BAD idea even after it cost the US 4500 dead and $2T, oh and also our standing in the world. Not to mention at least 100,000 Iraqi dead.

          • To know the brucehemorrhoid is to behold the depths of depravity.

          • Jwb10001

            A stopped clock is right twice a day which is once more than Biden. I said Biden also said Iraq would be a shinning example blah blah , you countered with, so Wolfowitz and Kristol claimed blah blah. Is that not comparing 2 wrongs? But hey I’m not going to argue with the smartest guy on the interwebs, my vocabulary and spelling aren’t up to it.

  • GarandFan

    Biden has performed his job admirably. He is Baracks life insurance policy. Does anyone want to see President Biden?

  • Come to think of it, we haven’t seen him for a while, have we?

    I’d say… he had a stroke, and they’re keeping it hush-hush.

    • Retired military

      No Biden is sulking since Hillary told him that McCain was her pick for VP in 2016.

      • jim_m

        Sad thing is that McCain would do it in a heartbeat.

        • Retired military

          I am telling you it is going to happen. Mark my words.

          • westcoastwiser

            I’ve got my crayons out.

    • jim_m

      The question is not whether Bill has had a stroke but who gave it to him. 😉

      • Retired military

        Monica did. With her tongue.

  • Paul Hooson

    I’m very alarmed the way ISIS has become the world’s best financed terrorist organization. When they overrun a city, they loot the banks and have stolen millions of dollars in gold, in addition to extorting businesses in conquered cities and towns for money to continue to operate. In addition, they sell conquered oil and electricity services to Assad’s Syria as well profit from kidnapping and other extortion schemes as well as are involved in drug trade. ISIS may now be worth an estimated $2 billion dollars now, well more than either al Qaeda or the Taliban combined. Oil prices will rise due to all this as well, hurting our economy and national well being and security.

    Up to several thousand persons may work as contractors in Iraq or hold U.S. passports. This raises concerns of kidnappings or murders of Americans, or that some who hold U.S. Passports who support ISIS will be able to slip into the U.S. easily, and could bring terrorism here to the U.S.

    The extent that U.S. interests are threatened here cannot be understated. Obama needs to act decisively.

    • jim_m

      He has acted decisively. He has chosen to do nothing .

      • warnertoddhuston

        And besides, when has been being an American in a foreign country something that Obama cares much about? He won’t even help a US ambassador being murdered in a foreign country, why would you expect he’d care about regular folks?

    • westcoastwiser

      It’s not amazing at all… the Kuwaitis and Saudis have deep pockets.

      • Commander_Chico

        “Our friends.”

        • More so than the mad mullahs 0bama has been sucking up to.

          • Commander_Chico

            How many Iranians were on the planes on 9/11?

            Is the section about Iranian activities prior to 9/11 redacted from the 9/11 Commission report and classified?

  • Commander_Chico
    • Yeah, if you dhimmocrats could just stop pissing away what better men achieved with blood, sweat, turmoil, and tears.

      • jim_m

        But then where would Chico get the dead bodies to stand on while he pushes his ideology?

      • Commander_Chico
        • About the only opinions which matter less to me than Pat Buchanan’s are yours and the hemorrhoids.

          Sadly Pat has accidentally hit on a point.

          Since this maladministration cannot be trusted to carry a conflict to a successful resolution the Congress should prevent them from undertaking to do so.

  • alanstorm

    Biden IS Obama’s foreign policy expert.

    Make of that what you will.

  • westcoastwiser

    It’s too late. Biden already has a job. He’s the Village Idiot!

    • Retired military

      He stole that job from Chico?

  • westcoastwiser

    I guess Wizbang needs to run this article 3 days in a row so Biden can read the whole article.