Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Biden’s massive military aid package neglects the real strategic threat: China

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Contra, Apr 29, 2024.

  1. Contra

    Contra GC Legend

    931
    226
    138
    May 15, 2023
    The package reflects the Biden administration’s skewed strategic priorities: It provides $60.8 billion for Ukraine in its war of attrition with Russia, with much of the funding going to U.S. defense contractors and the Pentagon; $26.4 billion for Israel and America’s supporting military operations in the Middle East; and a relatively miserly $8.1 billion for Taiwan and other security challenges in the Indo-Pacific region — the world’s center of gravity where America’s main rival, China, is incrementally changing the territorial and maritime status quo.

    The congressional logjam over the package had jeopardized the centerpiece of Biden’s foreign policy, which has focused America’s attention and resources on the wars in Europe and the Middle East. But the region central to the global balance of power and peace is the Indo-Pacific.

    The longer the U.S. remains involved in the conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, the greater will be the likelihood of China invading Taiwan. It is telling that, under Biden, an overextended America is seeking to dissuade Chinese President Xi Jinping from launching an attack on Taiwan more through diplomacy than deterrence.

    Biden’s latest defense budget, and the small outlays for the Indo-Pacific in the $95.3 billion package, show that deterrence against China has assumed a subsidiary policy role. The budget not only underfunds key enabling capabilities for the Indo-Pacific but also cuts programs, including slashing the production goal for Virginia-class submarines from two per year to just one.

    Biden’s massive military aid package neglects the real strategic threat: China | The Hill


    I can't say anything really surprises me with respect to Biden's foreign policy after Afghanistan. Par for the course.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  2. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    9,366
    931
    1,468
    Apr 8, 2007
    Yeah ... I'm totally shocked that this bipartisan war funding bill is spending most of it's war money on places where there is an actual war happening ... makes no sense ...

    The US policy on Taiwan couldn't be dumber. We official acknowledge that Taiwan is part of "One China", but also want to defend Taiwan from China in case they attack themselves ... and that stupidity started with Nixon.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  3. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    7,548
    1,648
    3,013
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    I'm sure if Biden sent more money to Taiwan Republicans would be lining up to applaud him. AMIRITE?
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. Contra

    Contra GC Legend

    931
    226
    138
    May 15, 2023
    How about sending the weapons that Taiwan purchased? That would be a start. Also why is Huawei allowed to manufacture computers with Intel chips in them? If you are going to limit chip supply, then follow through with that strategy. Biden is just soft. We know from history that playing soft does not work with authoritarian dictators.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    7,548
    1,648
    3,013
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    When Biden signed a bill securing billions in aid to Ukraine and Israel was he soft?
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  6. murphree_hall

    murphree_hall VIP Member

    7,693
    3,888
    2,698
    Jul 11, 2019
    OP thinks Russia is not a strategic threat. :confused:
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
  7. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    4,548
    757
    2,078
    Aug 14, 2007
    the irony of conservative making this statement after the Ukraine aid fiasco in congress makes me lol
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  8. GatorJMDZ

    GatorJMDZ gatorjack VIP Member

    23,191
    2,206
    1,868
    Apr 3, 2007
    Add the Afghanistan War to the list of things you don't know about....stat.
     
  9. G8tas

    G8tas GC Hall of Fame

    3,079
    604
    383
    Sep 22, 2008
    The Ukraine bill wouldn't have gone through without Trump's approval. For that I thank him.
     
  10. Contra

    Contra GC Legend

    931
    226
    138
    May 15, 2023
    Russia is the country we should be negotiating with. The foreign policy strategies of the Biden and Obama administrations provoked them into this war. There was no reason to expand NATO right up to Russia's doorstep. At the end of WWII NATO was thousands of miles to the west of where it is right now, and all NATO has done is gradually expand further west for no reason when the real threat is in the Pacific. If we had agreed Ukraine would not join NATO, then this would not have happened.

    Also, Israel can fight their own war in the Middle East. They can more than hold their own against Iran.

    A sound foreign policy strategy would have prevented this war from happening. It would have involved giving Russia a seat at the economic table so that they did not feel economically left behind with Ukraine joining NATO. It would have involved not bringing NATO right up to Russia's front porch. It would have involved economic cooperation with Russia to swing them away from China's orbit, so that the Russia-China alliance never would have materialized in the first place. Obama and Biden isolated Russia and drove them into the hands of China. And now this is what we are dealing with.

    Europe owning the war effort vs. Russia, Israel owning the war efforts vs. Iran, and the United States taking on China undistracted is the ideal long-term strategy here. China has purposefully opened 3 different fronts that America has to defend simultaneously. We have played into this strategy of spreading the US military thin. Going to the negotiating table with Russia to end the war in Europe would be the ideal move here. Telling them we won't add border states to NATO would help. Also sending a clear message to Europe that they are going to foot their own national and continental defense bill from now on would be a good step that allows the US to have a singular focus on our greatest global military threat, China.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  11. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    9,366
    931
    1,468
    Apr 8, 2007
    I can't believe how many republicans want to kiss Putin's ass... Reagan would be proud :rolleyes:
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  12. gatorjo

    gatorjo GC Legend

    755
    153
    163
    Feb 24, 2024
    Entered thread to see Trumpy traitor Russian apologist follow marching orders and try to downplay flagrant murderous Russian aggression.

    Leaving satisfied.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. G8tas

    G8tas GC Hall of Fame

    3,079
    604
    383
    Sep 22, 2008
    What happened to the conservatives saying that the war started because Putin was battling Nazis?
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  14. Contra

    Contra GC Legend

    931
    226
    138
    May 15, 2023
    Those aren't conservatives. That is Russian propaganda IMO.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. murphree_hall

    murphree_hall VIP Member

    7,693
    3,888
    2,698
    Jul 11, 2019
    I feel bad that you typed all of this and I'm not going to respond, but I'm sorry man... it's just too much in here to address and I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze in this case.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. vaxcardinal

    vaxcardinal GC Hall of Fame

    6,540
    979
    2,043
    Apr 8, 2007
    There’s a massive amount of resources being put towards the china problem. It’s just not in the form of military hardware purchases that most people expect to see when they hear “military aid”
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    7,726
    1,722
    1,283
    May 31, 2007
    Montgomery, AL
    That’s not entirely true. The rapprochement with the PRC started with Nixon, and very few people argue that it was not a good thing strategically. The policy you are referring to, however, started under Carter. And there’s a key caveat you have left out: yes, we acknowledge one China, and we do not object to the political unification of Taiwan with mainland China … as long as it is accomplished peacefully and in a mutually agreed manner. That is U.S. law signed under Carter (Public Law 96-8, 1979). Again, most people whether Democrats or Republicans don’t object to that policy. It is China that has failed to lure Taiwan back in the fold with its brutal repression of human rights at Tiananmen, Hong Kong, Tibet, and the Uighur regions. Most Taiwanese would absolutely prefer to under a united China but not at the expense of the political and economic liberties they have built over the last 70 years.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    14,014
    1,024
    2,038
    Jan 5, 2022
    Biden’s original aim was to weaken Russia, through proxy war, so as to bring its resources to bear on China.

    Instead, it has driven Russia and China together.

    Spectacular failure.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    14,014
    1,024
    2,038
    Jan 5, 2022
  20. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    9,366
    931
    1,468
    Apr 8, 2007
    Wikipedia says the "One China" policy was first stated in 1972 in the Shanghai Communique "the United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China.[3] The United States does not challenge that position.", so that would have been Nixon.

    While I don't doubt the intentions you stated are true, the US simply gave Taiwan an easy out of saying 'no thanks' to Chinas requests for reunification. It again doesn't make sense to me to acknowledge it's one country, but then set expectations that China has to play nice to 'lure them back'. 50 years ago there may have been some hope that China would turn into a friendly ally, and Taiwan would see the benefits of reunification, but they've been heading in the opposite direction for a long time. Taiwan has made it clear they consider themselves a separate country. It's the US that has ended up "playing nice" to China for little gain.