The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Stephen J. Sniegoski Archive
Biden’s Foreign Policy: the New World Order and Woodrow Wilson
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“If I have any expertise, it’s American foreign policy. It’s what I’ve done my whole career. It’s what I’ve devoted my academic and my political experience to.”—Joe Biden

About Joe Biden, President Obama’s Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote: “He’s a man of integrity, incapable of hiding what he really thinks, and one of those rare people you know you could turn to for help in a personal crisis. Still, I think he’s been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

So far, Democratic presidential candidates have said very little about foreign policy, being largely focused on the domestic arena. However, foreign policy is where the president has nearly absolute power to send troops around the globe, launch wars—in the past 75 years at least—establish international agreements, and make trade deals.

With Trump behind the leading Democratic contenders in the polls, it is likely that a Democrat will be elected president in 2020. Biden is currently the most electable. Polls show that he is not only substantially ahead of his Democratic rivals, but that he is farthest ahead of Trump in the general election. With this being said, it is important to look at what his foreign policy is likely to be.

Despite Biden’s gaffes and weird alterations of the past, he has been regarded as quite knowledgeable on international affairs, since he served much of his time on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He was selected as Obama’s vice president in large measure because of his foreign affairs experience. And while hardly a Kissingeresk thinker, Biden has developed his own views on this subject upon which he is quite articulate.

Steve Clemons of the Atlantic Magazine discussed foreign policy issues with Biden toward the end of the Obama presidency. Although Clemons differed with several of Biden’s positions, he found him very knowledgeable, with firm views that he had developed over the years. Clemons wrote: “I have traveled with Biden during his vice presidential tenure to Asia and Europe, watched him interact with foreign leaders abroad and at home, and have had wide-ranging discussions with him since his Senate days on everything from the confirmation battle over John Bolton’s nomination as U.N. ambassador to how the U.S. should approach its challenges in Iraq and Afghanistan. I haven’t always agreed with Biden’s positions, but those positions have tended to follow a pattern and demonstrate a consistency of approach, analysis, and engagement that stands out—particularly when compared with many other foreign-policy players who often don’t leave clear footprints.”

In 2008, when Biden was running as Obama’s vice presidential candidate, Laura Rozen wrote a descriptive article titled “Biden’s Worldview” in Mother Jones, based on the view of a former Senate Foreign Relations committee staff member, which held that “Joe Biden firmly fits into the liberal interventionist school of thought that dominated the Democratic Party during the latter half of the 1990s through 2003. At his core, he is a man comfortable with the use of American military power, as demonstrated by the key role he played in encouraging the Clinton Administration to launch air strikes in the former Yugoslavia, setting the stage for the successful Dayton peace talks and the NATO peacekeeping mission. Biden came of age politically in the 1970’s, when he saw first-hand what the ‘Vietnam syndrome’ did to the Democratic Party for more than a generation. . . . He recognizes that military power is but only one tool in our nation’s arsenal, and that soft power plays an equally critical role. However, he is not afraid to advocate for military power where appropriate, as he did correctly in the Balkans, to his regret in Iraq in 2002, and today when it comes to Darfur (the judgment remains out on that score).”

A similar view is presented in a recent article by Alex Ward in the popular liberal-leaning news website Vox, which states that Biden “adheres to the traditional center-left worldview espoused by most establishment Democrats, which emphasizes America’s role as a champion of democracy and human rights around the world, places high value on maintaining alliances, and sees American military power on balance as a force for good in the world.”

Ward continues: “He’s [Biden] a strong advocate of NATO and of having close relationships with America’s traditional European allies. He wants to firmly push back against Russia’s aggression. He’d like to work with Latin American countries to stamp out corruption, curb violence, and democratize the region.”

Similarly, Fred Kaplan in Slate writes: “Biden has always been a champion of the alliances that he sees as the foundation of U.S. power and values—especially NATO but also with nations in Asia and the Western Hemisphere.”

What has not been given much attention in Biden’s foreign policy is a strong element of Wilsonian idealism, which came out strongly in Biden’s attachment to the concept of the New World Order, a term that President George H.W. Bush often used during the time of the Gulf War (1991-1992), though his version was far less developed and idealistic than Biden’s would be. Biden would maintain that Bush’s term lacked clarity, which he intended to provide.

On April 23, 1992, Biden wrote an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal entitled, “How I Learned to Love the New World Order,” in which he extolled “collective security” through the United Nations and called for a “permanent commitment of forces for use by the [UN] Security Council” to maintain global peace.

From June 29 to July 1, 1992, Biden delivered four speeches to the U.S. Senate dealing with the “New World Order.” The titles of his presentations were: “The Threshold of the New World Order: The Wilsonian Vision and American Foreign Policy in the 1990’s and Beyond;” “An American Agenda for the New World Order; Organizing for Collective Security;” and “Launching an Economic-Environmental Revolution.”

ORDER IT NOW

Biden asserted that “we are on the threshold of a new world order, and the present [George H.W. Bush] administration is not sure what the order is. But I would like to suggest how we might begin to reorganize our foreign policy. . . . Our current President [George H.W. Bush] and his administration have shown neither the aptitude nor the will to infuse this idea with meaning through coherent agenda for action. My theme is that we must rescue this concept from negligence and pursue an active new world order agenda.”

Biden went on to claim that “[t]he Bush administration has betrayed its own express policies and achieved, in each case a result opposite to what is both possible and necessary. Saddam’s heinous and still-dangerous regime lives on while the promise of breathing new life into world institutions of collective action has been allowed to wither.”

Given the failure of the Bush administration to pursue a bona fide New World Order, Biden held that it was imperative that “the Gulf War’s ambiguous outcome not be allowed to jeopardize the momentous concept the President associated with the war.” Biden urged that that the “concept of the new world order” be rescued from “cynicism,” and “become the organizing principle of American foreign policy in the 1990’s and into the next century.”

Biden glorified Woodrow Wilson’s effort to establish a fundamentally new U.S. foreign policy relevant to the 20th century, jettisoning America’s traditional non-interventionist position vis-à-vis Europe and consequent avoidance of “entangling alliances.” “Wilson and his followers,” Biden opined, “recognized that if a nation wished to protect itself and its way of life in the 20th century, its defenses must consist not merely in its own armed strength but also in reliable mechanisms of international cooperation and joint decision. For a world in dire need of a new order, the Wilsonian promise was sweeping: That rationality might be imposed upon chaos and that principles of political democracy, national self-determination, economic cooperation, and collective security might prevail over repression and carnage in the affairs of mankind. This was, it seemed, an idea whose time had come.” Biden viewed the failure of the U.S. to enter the League of Nations to be a tragedy of monumental proportions.

Biden saw Wilson’s goal rejuvenated at the end of World War II. “As America emerged from the Second World War, the supreme legacy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt was an economic and military superpower with a will to lead. Those in the Truman years who sought to resume Wilson’s work, the work of building a true world order brought historic statesmanship to the task—the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary fund, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the Marshall plan, the World Health Organization and a host of other worthy U.N. agencies, the Fulbright Exchange Program, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization the Organization of American States and later the European community—became their monuments.”

Biden asserted that it was “the duty of this generation of Americans to complete the task that Woodrow Wilson began.” He held that “[o]f all the world’s multinational institutions . . . only NATO has the ability to bring coordinated, multinational military force to bear.” [July 1 speech] And he contended that “[i]nstead of tiptoeing toward a revised mandate, NATO should make a great leap forward—by adopting peacekeeping outside NATO territory as a formal alliance mission.”

While Biden recognized that NATO was currently the best way to maintain global security, it was not optimal. He held that “to realize the full potential of collective security, we must divest ourselves of the vainglorious dream of a Pax Americana—and look instead for a means to regularize swift, multinational decision and response.”[July 1 presentation] Biden held that “[t]he mechanism to achieve this lies—unused—in article 43 of the United Nations Charter, which provides that: All members undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces . . . necessary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security.” In taking this position, Biden’s view gravitated toward oneworldism.

In these 1992 speeches, Biden maintained that America needed to reestablish a Wilsonian vision of a New World Order. Woodrow Wilson was still a Democrat hero in the 1990s, which is not the case today since Wilson, who grew up in the Civil War Era South, is now recognized as a staunch segregationist. Among his segregationist positions, Wilson, as president, resegregated those parts of the federal government that had been integrated in the post-Civil War era. Biden has already gotten into trouble with the Democratic base for acknowledging that he worked with Southern segregationists to pass legislation, some of which dealt with school busing for integration. It is thus doubtful that Biden and his coterie of advisors would make any mention of Wilson.

Furthermore, it is unlikely that Biden will now support much of what he expressed in the early 1990s, or even during his tenure as vice president. Antony Blinken, one of Biden’s chief foreign policy advisers going back to Biden’s time in the Senate, stated: “There’s a very stark recognition that the world has changed, we are not going back to the way we did things. There are certain basic principles that worked before and should work again, but it’s very clear that the world is different, including from when [the Obama administration] found it in 2008. We need the foreign policy for the world as we find it today and as we anticipate it for tomorrow.”

Nevertheless, Biden preaches a return to international cooperation which he, like most of the mainstream media, charges President Trump with destroying. “Donald Trump’s brand of America first,” Biden asserted in his July 11, 2019 speech, “has too often led to America alone, making it much harder to mobilize others to address the threats to our common well-being.” Actually, Allied defense spending increased by more than 9 percent from 2016 to 2018—the largest increase is 25 years.

Central to Biden’s effort to reestablish international cooperation is a global summit meeting he would arrange with the world’s democracies, non-governmental organizations and corporations—especially high tech and social media companies—to seek a common agenda to protect their shared values.

While befriending democracies, Biden declared he “would remind the world that we are the United States of America and we do not coddle dictators.” He has charged Trump for doing just that in regard to China, Russia, and North Korea.

While it might be argued that Biden’s positions today have little to do with what he advocated in the past when the United States was considered to be in a “unipolar” world, that does not seem to be the case. While he is not going to turn over America’s military to the Security Council of the United Nations as he mentioned in his 1992 speech on collective security, he still thinks in terms of democracy and collective security, as opposed to realpolitik or non-interventionism. It is not apparent, however, that if Biden became president, he would be able to draw substantial support for his foreign policy in Congress, especially from the progressive branch.

 
Hide 72 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Scotto says:

    “Russian agression” What Russian agression?

    • Agree: NoseytheDuke, AnonFromTN
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  2. In other words, regardless of who gets elected in 2020, the (((deep state))) keeps winning.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Wally
  3. Woodrow Wilson was the worst president of the United States, and responsible for America’s worst foreign policy blunder.

    He also invaded Mexico, just for fun!

    • Agree: Agent76
    • Replies: @Agent76
    , @Wally
  4. Tusk says:

    I’ve seen ‘polls’ where Yang will apparently beat Trump, at this point we all should know ‘polls’ have some degree of imagination in them.

  5. Antares says:

    Today there are two articles on UR about a person: a dangerous American expansionist and a dangerous Zionist expansionist. Can’t help to be reminded to an old song:

    “The lunatic is in the hall
    The lunatics are in my hall
    The paper holds their folded faces to the floor
    And every day the paper boy brings more”
    (Dark side of the moon)

    I quess that Joe Biden is actually a very reliable man. You could buy a car from him. Or a tank, or anti-air missiles, or just the whole stinking war at once.

    • Replies: @sally
  6. Biden & his Zionist buddies did of the USA a fake Republic endangering humanity.

  7. WHAT says:

    “Joe Biden is a pedophile neocohen slave”.

    Here, I compressed your article.

  8. Adrian E. says:

    Biden belongs to this very dangerous brand of US politicians who misuse humanitarian arguments for illegal military aggressions that nearly always lead to a massive deterioration of the humanitarian situation.

    Certainly, Hillary Clinton and Nicholas Sarkozy were more active in that case, but Biden was also personally a part of a government that committed the crime of a war of aggression (the supreme crime according to the Nuremberg tribunal) in Libya. This violation of international law with false humanitarian arguments (including clear fake news like Viagra being distributed to Libyan solders for rapes or allegations about Black African mercenaries that later inspired massacres of Blacks by NATO‘s „heroes“ on the ground) was particularly egregious. First, the aggressor countries put through a UN security council resolution that would have temporary restricted the Libyan army‘s possibilities of conquering back the parts of the country that were occupied by Islamist extremists, but clearly did not allow a regime change war (the resolution was only accepted because it clearly did not authorize a regime change war, Russia and Germany abstained and at least Russia would otherwise have voted against it) and then, the US, France, and Britain betrayed the diplomatic commitments and went on with a regime change war, anyway. The terrible humanitarian consequences of the illegal war of aggression against Libya are still there and no end is in sight – and the main criminals responsible for it are still at large and probably will be.

    In the last decades, the US – mostly together with a subset of NATO countries – have committed an illegal war of aggression every few years. Mostly, humanitarian arguments (human rights, democracy) were used as justification for these illegal wars of aggression – and this even went on after it had become clear that the most likely outcome is a massive deterioration of the humanitarian situation. The NATO rogue states‘ actions in violation of international law have left a large trail of destruction, failed states, and empowering terrorist groups.

    But the danger of politicians like Biden who seem to want to continue such illegal wars of aggression with false humanitarian arguments goes beyond the suffering in countries targeted for destruction by the US and its fellow NATO rogue states, there is a danger of a wider war that could escalate to a nuclear war, and the reason for this is that the other world powers (Russia, China) won’t always be idle when the Western powers continue their serial crime of wars of aggression and destroy one country after the other. The regime change wars only target countries with weak militaries, and as soon as they are supported by stronger countries, that kind of regime change wars does not work any more – which, of course, was one of the main reasons for the escalation of the new cold war.

    The situation in Syria is a clear case. If the „humanitarian West“ had had its way in Syria and the secular government had been toppled (perhaps after massive bombings by NATO countries like in Libya), the strongest anti-government forces, Al Qaeda and Daesh (perhaps together with other Islamist extremists like Jaish Al Islam, Al Zenki, Tahrir Al Sham, which were directly or indirectly supported by NATO countries and their allies) would have taken power in all of Syria, and gigantic massacres of Alawites, Christians, Shia Muslims and secular-oriented Sunnis would most likely have followed. Luckily, this nightmare scenario has been averted – mainly thanks to the presence of a relatively small part of the Russian army. Of course, preventing US rogue state crimes has enraged neoconservatives and led to the escalation of anti-Russian rhetorics. There also was the idea of direct war against Russia – before the 2016 elections, Hillary Clinton uttered plans for Syria that would have meant war against Russia and possibly world war III even according to mainstream US security experts generals. The Tomahawk bombings after dubious allegations about the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government were also an extreme case of brinkmanship – it is a case of irresponsible behavior by Trump, but many commentators in the „liberal“ mainstream urged him that there should be really destructive attacks against the Syrian government that would help the Jihadist militias and might have escalated to a world war.

    By now, it is clear that the rest of the world won’t be idle any more when the US and fellow NATO rogue states violate international law and commit acts of aggression every few years (and on an ongoing basis on a smaller scale with drone strikes). The terrible humanitarian consequences (and the absurd humanitarian justifications for them) are not tolerated any more. Therefore, a core ingredient of the rhetoric of politicians like Biden who want to continue illegal wars of aggression is extremely hostile rhetoric against Russia and increasingly also China, the main countries that hinder US rogue actions. This hostile rhetoric is more extreme and unhinged than during most periods of the old cold war. During the old cold war, more people were conscious about how dangerous escalating the tensions was, and the idea of detente was more widely considered important. Hostile, belligerent rhetoric generally does not directly lead to nuclear war, but it makes it much more likely that conflicts escalate when they arise, which could have fatal consequences.

    Trump certainly is not ideal – in contradiction to much of his campaign rhetoric, he has appointed extreme neoconservatives to important posts. He has used very aggressive threats against different countries, but unlike most of his predecessors, he has not started a new large war for several years. On the whole, he seems to be similar to Obama – their views don’t completely align with the neocons, but they let them mostly, but not always have their way (Hillary Clinton, who was supported by most neocons, would probably have given them even more free rein than Obama and Trump).

    I think that the danger of war should be one of the primary concerns, and it does not fit well into partisan politics. In my view, some of the Democratic candidates are less dangerous than Donald Trump, while others are more dangerous.

    Tulsi Gabbard is certainly less dangerous. She has made ending regime change wars and the new cold war the centerpiece of her campaign. Of course, it would not be easy to prevail against the deep state, but someone who is as determined as Tulsi Gabbard to try probably offers the best chance. The fact that she is a soldier also takes away favorite slurs of neoconservative chickenhawks. There is no other scenario that would make me as optimistic for the medium term future of the US as the election of Tulsi Gabbard. She is generally on the progressive side, but without the hyperpartisanship that is typical of most US politicians of both parties, and, apart from leading the world away from the brink of world war III, concluding new weapons limitation agreements, and reducing the insane US military spending, she might also be able to help healing some of the wounds of societal polarization. Age should hardly be the primary concern, but it is hardly a good sign when we see that most important contenders (Trump, Biden, Sanders, Warren) are in retirement age and the US seems to be as gerontocratic as the Soviet Union in its end phase – a relatively young woman could be a good change.

    I also think that Bernie Sanders is clearly less dangerous than Donald Trump. He has a long record of being at least against some US military aggressions and in favor of limiting military spending. Unlike Jeremy Corbyn with whom he is sometimes compared, Bernie Sanders is no principled opponent of all illegal military aggressions, but he is certainly less in favor of war than the vast majority of US politicians. Unfortunately, unlike Tulsi Gabbard, he has not made the rejection of regime change wars a central point of his agenda. I also find it unfortunate that he supported the evidence-free Russiagate conspiracy theory (at least, unlike many Democrats, he did not make it a central point of his agenda) and made very one-sided statements against the Venezuelan government that seemed to favor the supporters of a violent coup. But on the whole, I think it is clear that – from the viewpoint of avoiding a dangerous escalation of conflicts by irresponsible politicians – Bernie Sanders is the lesser evil compared to the vast majority of US politicians.

    I am not so sure about Elizabeth Warren. On the whole, she probably occupies intermediate ground like Obama and Trump. Unlike Bernie Sanders, she voted in favor of the massive increase in military spending under Trump. One memorable moment was when in an interview, unlike most „liberal“ commentators who hate Trump for not being hawkish enough, she refused to condemn Trump‘s plans for troop withdrawal from Syria. I think there are good reasons to fear that Elizabeth Warren would appoint many Clintonite neocons and „liberal interventionists“ to important positions, but in comparison to Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden it seems less likely that she would give them free rein and align with them completely.

    Joe Biden, who still supports illegal „humanitarian“ wars of aggression although the devastating consequences of these crimes must be clear by now and who uses extremely hostile rhetoric against Russia, is, in my view, clearly more dangerous than Donald Trump. He supported all US wars of aggression in the last decades, including G.W.Bush‘s aggression against Iraq a significant number of Democrats opposed. Certainly, many neocons who in 2016 hoped for a Clinton victory would immediately be promoted to positions of power if Biden became president, and he would hardly do anything for moderating their aggressive desires. Apart from his dangerous pro-war positions, the clear signs that he is in the process of even losing the mental capabilities he once had, add to the dangers. A pro-war president with hateful rhetoric against other world powers who is less and less able to think clearly (and will probably be egged on by extreme neocons) would probably be extremely dangerous.

    Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar were less involved personally in US rogue state behavior than Joe Biden, but some of their remarks show that they are extremely hawkish and irresponsible, and it would be very dangerous for the world if they became president. Luckily that does not seem very likely, Joe Biden is the main danger.

    Unfortunately, at the moment it does not look as if Tulsi Gabbard could be elected. The best scenario I can imagine is that she has relatively good results in the primaries, but then her delegates support Bernie Sanders, Bernie Sanders is elected and appoints her to an important position like Secretary of State. Such an administration would probably act relatively responsibly – and Tulsi Gabbard might have good chances of becoming president some time in the future.

    It is easy to imagine nightmare scenarios with Joe Biden as president. In order to bury stories about him threatening Ukraine in order to help Burisma and his son Hunter Biden, the fight for imposing propaganda and branding legitimate criticism of corruption as fake news and Russian propaganda would probably have to be escalated, and then, it might be that the mainstream press would pretend the emperor is not naked and pretend there are no signs of mental decline even when there are clearer than now. These nightmares can go on with Biden mumbling incoherent hate paroles against Russia and China and about bringing freedom and democracy to the world by means of war and neocons rejoicing that there is no one in positions of power who at least sometimes reins in their far-reaching plans.

  9. Nik says:

    Article is deeply flawed

  10. G. Poulin says:

    Biden wants to “protect our way of life”? Wake up, Joe, our way of life is gone with the effing wind.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  11. With Trump behind the leading Democratic contenders in the polls, it is likely that a Democrat will be elected president in 2020. Biden is currently the most electable. Polls show that he is not only substantially ahead of his Democratic rivals, but that he is farthest ahead of Trump in the general election.

    Polls? You mean like the ones that gave Clinton a 90=99% chance of winning?

  12. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    Joe Biden was born 20 november 1942 , in november he will be 77 years old , he is falling appart , he and he and his son have strange and lucrative conexions with Ukraina

    https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/07/viral-image/fact-checking-joe-biden-hunter-biden-and-ukraine/

    How come that the US , America ,the new world , the land of the young , of the new , the land of image , of Hollywood considers such an old man for President ?

    Gerontocratic decadence ?

    • Replies: @follyofwar
    , @AnonFromTN
  13. Realist says:

    Despite Biden’s gaffes and weird alterations of the past, he has been regarded as quite knowledgeable on international affairs, since he served much of his time on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He was selected as Obama’s vice president in large measure because of his foreign affairs experience. And while hardly a Kissingeresk thinker, Biden has developed his own views on this subject upon which he is quite articulate.

    Because you do something for years doesn’t mean you know a god damn thing about it…particularly in government.

  14. This is the most flaccid piece of writing I’ve seen on UR. Sniegoski seems to saying that (a) Biden is likely to be the Democrat nominee for President next year and end up as President, and (b) that he is a Wilsonian interventionist in foreign policy and (c) his “interventionism” would get thwarted by the Dem progressives.

    “a” seems highly unlikely, “b” is glaringly, dog-bites-man, obvious, “c’” is irrelevant given what Sniegoski says in the second paragraph of his article … “foreign policy is where the president has nearly absolute power to send troops around the globe, launch wars—in the past 75 years at least—establish international agreements, and make trade deals.”

    • Replies: @ger
  15. With this being said, it is important to look at what [Biden’s] foreign policy will be.

    Wait, Alex, I know this one!

    What is Israel First?

  16. @G. Poulin

    At some point somebody from the DNC will explain to Joe that the purpose of US foreign policy is to make the world safe for perverts.

    (“No Joe, you can’t actually _say_ that…”) 😉

    As to the original article, it is kinda missing the elephant in the room–in a kleptocracy, public policy discussions are the equivalent of senior citizens chatting at the coffee klatch.

  17. Anonymous[203] • Disclaimer says:

    Does this semi-senile figurehead actually have a foreign policy that’s not authored by Tony Blinken? What are Blinken’s views on mass immigration as a means of mixing the races under Biden/Blinken’s proposed NWO? There’s a UN-promoting interview Blinken did with the Grover puppet from Sesame Street about welcoming “refugees” because they’re “just like us,” unless of course they’re thinking of heading for Tel Aviv. There’ll be no wars because there’ll no longer be nations except Eretz Israel or peoples with clashing interests. This NWO that’s been an unwritten joint Republican/Dem objective for going on 30 years won’t come in the front door via military conquest, but unnoticed via ever-expanding UN bureaucracies dictating everything from our children’s education curriculum, diet, travel, housing, “carbon footprint,” etc. Watch for it coming to every farming community in America.

  18. GMC says:

    I was enjoying my brand new retirement , until Biden, Obama, McCain and Nuland showed up in Kyiv, Ukraine. They don’t only F….up the citizens in the USA , they just keep screwin Everybody – Anywhere, Any Place and then they claim – ” I have been doing Foreign Policy all of my political career”. Yes you have Joe – and I would love to be the one that Stops It. Do not vote for anyone that is in the top positions – fly your flag upside down and vote for the underdog Army Vet or – No One. thanks Unz Rev.

  19. Franz says:

    Biden asserted that it was “the duty of this generation of Americans to complete the task that Woodrow Wilson began.”

    Wilson had an excuse toward the end, he was a vegetized and his ditzy wife was effectively the president of … actually that doesn’t excuse Wilson’s earlier perfidy.

    The decision to “make the world safe for democracy” and give Americans the “tonic of a serious moral adventure” was on Wilson’s hook when he was still of sound mind and body, making him as much of a rotter as Nero without the excuse of lead-poison-induced lunacy. And nothing Nero did had as far-reaching and disastrous consequences.

    Biden picked the right hero. And he’ll be joining Woodrow on the same griddle soon enough, if the universe is just.

  20. Malla says:

    Woodrow Wilson–> FDR–> Johnson–> Trumph, all the same. Make promises against war. Instigate war.

  21. The NWO agenda is a zionist agenda and has been the zio/US agenda since 1913 with the fastening on America with the zionist banking kabals privately owned FED and IRS thus joining the zio/US into a latent NWO via the zionist central bank control in league with other zionist central banks in England and Europe and thereby controlling the world via zionist owned central banks and from this came the wars and debt and the destruction of the American way of life.

    There is nothing new under the zionist sun!

  22. I would never recommend Biden for a president. He would be a disaster. He does not understand present reality. Trump will win his second term. But if not I would recommend Warren.
    Women are of stubborn type and she would act by her own opinion. Not so much by outside influence.

  23. Biden’s foreign policy is really nothing more than the continuation of America’s oligarch controlled foreign policy. It relies heavily on the need for a New World Order, One World Government that came about in full force at the end of WWII. The Cold War was nothing more than a means of convincing people this was the only sane way to prevent a nuclear Armageddon.

    Bidden is simply a follower of the JFK plan. No matter how many here will yell and scream, and tell me JFK was the last “true American” president, I must say the proof is in the pudding. JFK was a died in the wool globalist, just like the sainted Republican Ronald Reagan.

    Part 1: Global Disarmament is the Plan: PL 87-297 is PROOF

    [MORE]

    The first place to start is in 1957, when the U.S Disarmament Agency was created and Congress adopted the disarmament plan. The U.S Disarmament Agency was a part of the State Department.

    Just a few short years later, on September 26th, 1961, Public Law 87-297 (HR 9118) was signed into existence by President John F. Kennedy. This bill established the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA), which replaced the U.S Disarmament Agency. The updated version is known as Public Law 101-216, signed on December 11th, 1989, but we will focus on JFK’s treason.

    The title of PL 87-297 states, “Freedom From War: The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.” It is a Department of State Publication (7277) and number five in the disarmament series and it has been added to and updated 18 times and none of its provisions have been deleted.

    Let me say this, before I go any further. If JFK was strictly advocating for peace and the reduction in the number of nuclear weapons, then that would be an admirable act. The major issue with this bill is that the government entity at the head is the United Nations.

    The introduction begins by saying, “First, there must be immediate disarmament action… Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international controls… Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established [the United Nations]… Nations are unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS AND BY CREATING A UNITED NATIONS PEACE FORCE TO ENFORCE THE PEACE AS THE DISARMAMENT PROCESS PROCEEDS.” {EMPHASIS ADDED}
    https://libertyunderattack.com/jfks-complicity-in-establishing-the-american-police-state-through-disarmament/

    • Replies: @Johnny Walker Read
  24. @Anon

    I lost interest in the article after I read Sniegoski’s statement that, among the D candidates “Biden is currently the most electable.”

    I understand that the average ‘joe’ on the street, who hasn’t been paying much attention yet, may think that Biden would make a good president, only because of his name recognition. But for Sniegoski to say that is incredible.

    It becomes more obvious every day that Biden is afflicted with senile dementia. It is sad that someone within his inner circle, (his wife, maybe?) hasn’t told him that it is time to step aside and take a long rest – for the rest of his life. I hate to see an old man ridiculed, but that is exactly what is happening to old Joe. For the good of the country (we’re no longer a nation), as well as his crumbling party, he need to step aside. And he should take 78 year old Bernie with him.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  25. ger says:
    @Stephen Paul Foster

    You know the Neoliberal, Wall Street, Hollywood, DNC Anointment Committee is desperate when Joe is considered their path to glory. HRC was not sober enough to make most morning rallies after bending her elbow all night at ten thousand dollar a glass hedge fund parties. Joe will have to make all his appearances by mid morning while his dementia meds are still holding. I note his handlers have made comments about limiting his attendance at evening forums.

    I can imagine Joe in a debate with Trump, as a bit of spittle runs down his chin, calling timeance ….. like Clinton when a hangover cloud messed with her head.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  26. @ger

    Latest Joe gaffe: youtu.be/_GYyt3ChLDI

    Put 720 million women back in workforce…

    The Biden campaign slogan: Non compos mentis

    • Replies: @c matt
  27. Agent76 says:

    April 26, 2019 A Vote for Biden is a Vote for Economic Asphyxiation and Never Ending War

    The state and its propaganda media love corporate news polls and they hope this one will convince Americans to vote establishment once again.

    https://kurtnimmo.blog/2019/04/26/a-vote-for-biden-is-a-vote-for-economic-asphyxiation-and-never-ending-war/

    July 29, 2019 Is Biden Worse Than Pompeo On North Korea?

    Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has repeatedly slammed President Trump over his ongoing diplomatic outreach to North Korea, claiming that the move just gives legitimacy to a dictator.

    April 02, 2019 Rotten To The Core Joe Biden’s 2020 Ukrainian nightmare A closed probe is revived

    Two years after leaving office, Joe Biden couldn’t resist the temptation last year to brag to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51376-c.htm

  28. sally says:
    @Antares

    Biden asserted that it was “the duty of this generation of Americans to complete the task that Woodrow Wilson began.” He held that “[o]f all the world’s multinational institutions . . . only NATO has the ability to bring coordinated, multinational military force to bear.” [July 1 speech] And he contended that “[i]nstead of tiptoeing toward a revised mandate, NATO should make a great leap forward—by adopting peacekeeping outside NATO territory as a formal alliance mission.”

    I wonder how Biden would respond to Rouhani’s comment that regional nations exist within and between those armed nation states which are sometimes multi times more powerful [and more capable and willing to defend their turf] than the puppet ruled franchised nation states which claims it governs everyone.

    IMO, Wilsonian institutionalization of the nation state system is doomed to failure as far as human rights are concerned because organized crime has possession of much the nation state system and as such; the criminals have used the armed and political powers of the nation state system to bully the governed, to destroy cooperation between nations and to establish for themselves armed governments and rule of law created private monopolies in order to further their criminal purposes. What needs to be destroyed is the nation state system, it divides humanity and allows those in control of the propaganda to polarize the people of one nation against the people of the other.

  29. Biff says:

    However, foreign policy is where the president has nearly absolute power to send troops around the globe, launch wars—in the past 75 years at least—establish international agreements, and make trade deals.

    I disagree. At this point in time I don’t think presidents have much power at all. The white “owners” of the U.S. are not going to let a black president whimsically order troops around, and make trade deals without a whole lot of permission – which translates into he was told what to do and when to do it.
    In addition, check the long list of items that Trump said he would do(pull troops out of Syria) and how many of them actually got done – the media calls them lies.

  30. Wally says:

    Poll results that Communists do not like:

    Majority Of Blacks, Hispanics Support Anti-Illegal Immigration Candidates For 2020: https://rightwing.news/harvard-poll-majority-of-blacks-hispanics-support-anti-illegal-immigration-candidates-for-2020/

    Majority of Hispanics Support Ending Welfare-Dependent Immigration:
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/14/poll-majority-of-hispanics-support-ending-welfare-dependent-immigration/

    5-in-9 Hispanics, 6-in-10 Black Americans Support Citizenship Question on Census: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/09/poll-5-in-9-hispanics-6-in-10-black-americans-support-citizenship-question-on-census/

    Half of Hispanic Americans Approve of Trump Following ICE Raids: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/16/poll-half-of-hispanic-americans-approve-of-trump-following-ice-raids/

  31. Agent76 says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Good post and here are a couple of more commentaries on the topic I have had.

    Nov 11, 2018 The WWI Conspiracy

    What was World War One about? How did it start? Who won? And what did they win?

    Now, 100 years after those final shots rang out, these questions still puzzle historians and laymen alike. But as we shall see, this confusion is not a happenstance of history, but the wool that has been pulled over our eyes to stop us from seeing what WWI really was. This is the story of WWI that you didn’t read in the history books. This is The WWI Conspiracy.

  32. Wally says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    And the US rejected joining Wilson’s League of Nations.

    • Replies: @Johnny Walker Read
  33. Harbinger says:

    The fact that people VOTE for these morons, pretty much sums up the sad, state of affairs that the US (and for their likewise politicians, Europe too) is in. As Joseph de Maistre stated: “Every nation gets the government it deserves.”

    This is the reality.
    The elites look upon the rest of society as ‘the profane’ and ‘useless eaters’ and when you look at them, you realise just why the elites look at them this way. They are obsessed with making money. They never seek to change the society they live within FROM this path. They have become completely addicted to sex purely for the sake of self pleasure, TV, some kind of vice, sports, music and actor celebrities and anything else, completely devoid of anything good and worth while in one’s life.

    Joe Biden is merely another ‘fix’ for the moronic peoples that make up the majority of those within the west. They care not to educate themselves in the truth, preferring to read, watch, listen to and accept the lies of the msm, politicians, academia professors and other talking head, sock puppets in society.
    Most people seriously think that Russia are the bad guys, along with Syria, Iran and whomever the msm tells them. It’s absolutely insane. People are incapable of critical thinking. They are devoid of any scepticism whatsoever. They simply accept and do and are the epitome of the sheep analogy of blindly following one another, to wherever their master tells them to go.

    When you look at the sad state of affairs you really start to question, if you are a truthseeker, why on earth you bother wanting to help these complete and utter waste of spaces, who aren’t even bothered to help themselves.
    The more I think of it, the more I actually think; “maybe WW3 is a good thing. Maybe it’s about time the world was shook up a hell of a lot. Maybe it’s time the moronic westerners actually were awoken horrifically from their content ignorant slumber. Maybe it might just make them see reality for what it really is instead of existing in the surreality they all are.”

  34. anonymous[180] • Disclaimer says:

    He’s a dangerous moron who is now obviously suffering from the onset of dementia. Some of the praise heaped on this ‘Wilsonian’ cretin is ridiculously over the top. He apparently likes committing war crimes all over the world, killing and displacing millions of people who have not attacked us. He was enthusiastic about bombing Yugoslavia and as part of the Obama administration bears responsibility for the atrocity of Libya and Syria, among other crimes. Insane power worshippers like him will take us to the brink with their impossible quest for world domination, all disguised as being “humanitarian”. The US will never be the world hegemon, never, even as it slowly weakens from within. He’s living in a dream world, high on the hog thanks to US taxpayers. Fortunately, he is unelectable. Once he steps into the larger spotlight, should he be the candidate, his stupidity and bizarreness will become apparent.
    Polls? What happened last time? The Dems have such a motley array because perhaps they themselves realize they won’t win so now it’s all show biz.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  35. Harbinger says:

    P.S.

    Some of you may state: “but a hell of a lot of innocent people will die should there be a massive world war.” That is true, yes, but quite frankly, the overwhelming majority of those ‘innocents’ are dead already. People aren’t living anymore. They’re simply existing. As much as I stay away from Hollywood and as much as Braveheart was slated by critics, I liked it for the message he was clearly getting across about fighting back, as he has in most of his films. More importantly there’s one quote within that sums up society and people: “Every man dies, not every man truly lives.”

    • Replies: @annoymous
  36. Paul says:

    Joe Biden grovels before the Israel lobby — they like that about him.

  37. Anon[725] • Disclaimer says:

    Tulsi Gabbard 2020.

    New World Order? …….We dont even control our own borders from drug smugglers and sex slave traffickers. Israel’s agents of influence have more sway in this country than our president. Its Alice-in-Wonderlandish

  38. Art says:

    Tulsi’s Foreign Policy: the New World Order

    Tulsi Gabbard Sparks Tweetalanche After Accusing Trump of ‘Acting Like Saudi Arabia’s B****

    Earlier, following reports that Houthi kamikaze drones had struck two major Saudi oil processing facilities, the president tweeted that he was “waiting to hear from the Kingdom” on who Riyadh thought was responsible, and how the two countries should proceed from here.

    Hawaii Congresswoman and Democratic presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard took a shot at President Donald Trump after he tweeted about the US being “locked and loaded” and ready to respond pending Saudi conclusions on who was responsible for this weekend’s drone attacks against the country’s oil supplies.

    Addressing the president at his @realDonaldTrump handle, Gabbard accused him of awaiting “instructions from his Saudi masters,” and blasting the president using his own “America First” rhetoric.

    “Having our country act as Saudi Arabia’s b**** is not ‘America First’,” Gabbard wrote.

    https://sputniknews.com/us/201909161076818443-tulsi-gabbard-sparks-tweetalanche-after-accusing-trump-of-acting-like-saudi-arabias-b/

    Think Peace (Christian Hope) — Art

    p.s. Hmm — Mr. Bluster “Lock and Load” did not answer her tweet. Who is the girl?

  39. Joe Biden was a big backer of George W Bush’s IRAQ WAR DEBACLE.

    Joe Biden supported and pushed for the IRAQ WAR DEBACLE.

    Joe Biden is an evil and immoral politician whore for the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire.

    Joe Biden pushes for more and more endless overseas war.

    Joe Biden wants to continue to use the US military as muscle to fight wars on behalf of Israel and Saudi Arabia and other nations.

    Joe Biden puts the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the United States of America.

    Joe Biden is an evil treasonous whore for the evil plutocrat globalizers who want to attack and kill US sovereignty.

    Tweet from 2015:

    • Agree: DESERT FOX
  40. renfro says:

    Biden is the last fucking person on earth I would vote for.

    ”Vice President Joe Biden spoke at length Tuesday night about the influence of Judaism on the United States, dating back to the country’s founding and to the present day.

    “The truth is that Jewish heritage, Jewish culture, Jewish values are such an essential part of who we are that it’s fair to say that Jewish heritage is American heritage,” he said. “The Jewish people have contributed greatly to America. No group has had such an outsized influence per capita as all of you standing before you, and all of those who went before me and all of those who went before you.”

    “You make up 11 percent of the seats in the United States Congress. You make up one-third of all Nobel laureates,” he said. “So many notions that are embraced by this nation that particularly emanate from over 5,000 years of Jewish history, tradition and culture: independence, individualism, fairness, decency, justice, charity. These are all as you say, as I learned early on as a Catholic being educated by my friends, this tzedakah.”

    “The embrace of immigration” is part of that, as is the involvement of Jews in social justice movements.

    “You can’t talk about the civil rights movement in this country without talking about Jewish freedom riders and Jack Greenberg,” he said, telling a story about seeing a group of Jewish activists at a segregated movie theater in Delaware. “You can’t talk about the women’s movement without talking about Betty Friedan” or American advances in science and technology without mentioning Einstein and Carl Sagan, or music and Gershwin, Bob Dylan and “so, so, so many other people.”

    “I believe what affects the movements in America, what affects our attitudes in America are as much the culture and the arts as anything else,” he said. That’s why he spoke out on gay marriage “apparently a little ahead of time.”

    “It wasn’t anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’ it was the social media. Literally. That’s what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace” gay marriage, Biden said.

    “Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry. The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good,” he said.

    Jews have also been key to the evolution of American jurisprudence, he continued, You can’t talk about the recognition of … rights in the Constitution without looking at these incredible jurists that we’ve had.”

    “Jewish heritage has shaped who we are – all of us, us, me – as much or more than any other factor in the last 223 years. And that’s a fact,” he said.

    “We talk about it in terms of the incredible accomplishments and contributions” of Jews in America, Biden added, but it’s deeper “because the values, the values are so deep and so engrained in American culture, in our Constitution.”

    “So I think you, as usual, underestimate the impact of Jewish heritage. I really mean that. I think you vastly underestimate the impact you’ve had on the development of this nation. We owe you, we owe generations who came before you,” he said.

    • Agree: Cloak And Dagger
    • Replies: @Biff
    , @Druid
  41. Joe Biden voted for — and pushed for — the IRAQ WAR DEBACLE.

    Joe Biden has had at least two brain surgeries to fix the many brain problems and brain malfunctions that have seriously damaged Biden’s ability to think clearly and to remember things clearly.

    Joe Biden is a brain-damaged treasonous politician whore who will push for more and more overseas war if he is elected president in 2020.

    Joe Biden’s brain-damaged warmongering and inability to think clearly is a clear and present threat to the safety, security and sovereignty of the USA.

    Biden falsely claims he opposed the Iraq War from the beginning

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  42. renfro says:

    ”They Who Seek To Establish A System of Government
    Based On the Regimentation Of All hman Beings
    By A Handfull Of Individual Rulers
    Call This A New World Order,
    Its Not New and Its Not Order.”
    ……..
    Inscribed on the FDR Memorial,

  43. Biff says:
    @renfro

    Biden is the last fucking person on earth I would vote for.

    Doesn’t matter, they’re just looking for a frontman to babble to the masses(the media can easily ignore his past). The voting show is just that – a show. It’s the circus part of bread and circuses.

    If a dopey prick like Biden suits their needs, he’s in.

    • Replies: @renfro
  44. c matt says:
    @Justvisiting

    I’m sure he was just thinking of his globalist priorities.

  45. renfro says:

    I am one who thinks Joe Biden is possibility becoming senile.
    His ‘gaffes” aren’t just gaffes, he clearly cant come up with the right words in some of his speech….which is a early indication.
    We went thur this with my wife’s 77 year old aunt. First she started using the wrong word to describe something, then she started forgetting the names of every day things, like can opener, then she would be in a store and say she needed milk for instance and 5 minutes later couldn’t remember she needed milk. When she started forgetting names of people she had known all her life we got her a full time CNA. It was gradual over about two + years before she had full blown dementia .
    Sanders is a year older than Biden and we don’t see the same speech and memory problems in him.
    So yea I think it is more than Biden’s typical ‘foot in mouth’ problem.

    • Replies: @Rabbitnexus
  46. @Anon

    Soviet Union had Politburo full of decrepit morons. We all know how that ended.

  47. @Charles Pewitt

    Joe Biden has had at least two brain surgeries

    Hey, that’s the only proof that he has a brain. Look on the bright side.

  48. If there two sides and if one side says

    1. I will protect your speech as well as ours

    while the other side says

    2. I will protect our speech but ban yours

    Side 2 will always win in the end…

    unless Side 1 has lots of lawyers and money to sue.

    Jews got their way with (1) strategy in the 60s because they had lots of lawyers and money.

    But now they are winning with (2) strategy because they now fear free speech absolutism as speaking-truth-to-Jewish-power. For those on the Right who call for (1) principle of free speech for all, they are losing because they don’t have high-powered lawyers or necessary funds on their side.

  49. MarkinLA says:
    @follyofwar

    Yeah, I can hardly wait until people start showing up at his ralleys claiming to be Corn Pop.

  50. Biden’s Foreign Policy: the New World Order and Woodrow Wilson

    Biden’s Foreign Policy Is To Invade The World And Then Drag Hordes Of Foreigners Back To The USA.

    Joe Biden was a big backer of the Obama/Rubio Illegal Alien Amnesty/Mass Legal Immigration Surge bill(S 744) of June of 2013.

    Biden’s immigration bill(S 744) would have given amnesty to upwards of 30 million illegal alien invaders and it would have doubled or tripled legal immigration into the USA. Biden’s immigration bill(S 744) would have poured 3 or 4 million legal immigration foreigners into the USA.

    Joe Biden’s foreign policy is to push for the mass legal immigration invasion of the USA by foreigners.

    Joe Biden’s foreign policy is to push to give amnesty to 30 million illegal alien invaders while allowing 30 million more illegal alien invaders to violently invade the USA.

    Joe Biden is anti-White.

    Joe Biden is pushing WHITE GENOCIDE.

    Joe Biden is pushing to replace the European Christian ancestral core of the USA with non-White foreigners.

    Joe Biden on European Americans becoming a minority in the USA due to mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration: “That’s a source of our strength.”

    • Agree: Poupon Marx
  51. renfro says:
    @Biff

    Biden is the status quo guy that Pelosi, Schumer, Hoyer and team picked.

  52. He and Hubert Humphrey have a lot in common. It was said of Humphrey that he would go from one speech venue to another and talk on the same subject and espouse opposing or contradictory positions. In other words, he said what the crowd wanted him to say. A crowd pleaser.

    Joe Biden is a busboy, not a waiter, a cook and certainly not a chef. Imagine in a private enterprise how high would Joe Blow rise? He is a symptom of a very sick society. How could such a squawk box get so high up? A mouth that is not connected to a brain, from which emanates dissonance and dreck.

  53. Wally says:
    @Fair Assessment

    said:
    “In other words, regardless of who gets elected in 2020, the (((deep state))) keeps winning.”

    That must be why Trump is so hated by the mentioned elites and why they are doing everything possible to prevent his re-election in 2020.

    ‘They’re all the same?

    Not really.

  54. On the other hand, if Biden is the Demonscat nominee, Trump will win in a landslide. Joe will freeze, stutter, and move his mouth but no sounds will be made in the debates. Trump will go for the throat like one of my cats on a mouse. I can see it now. It will not be pretty.

    See, comedy in Amurka is NOT dead!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  55. Irrelevant since none of the Democrat candidates currently running will be challenging Trump in 2020. This flock of fools are only chumming the water for the return of the big shark. The Hildebeast. Whether or not they know it. Warren just got the message I think. So actually in 2020 there’s a good chance Trump will win again. The Democrat party won’t be the one to decide. Clintons own the Democrats and they will decide.

  56. @renfro

    There are mental problems with all of the candidates and Trump has some of his own to boot. This is irrelevant. Anyway, Biden will not be running. That will be Clinton. It was always going to be Clinton. You will soon see her rising up from the deep and taking over the show. There she will lose to Trump once again. Indeed just about anyone else but she could beat him now but she does not care about that. In her mind, it belongs to her and she is going to get it by hook or by crook.

  57. @anonymous

    There is a pretty common joke (I saw it somewhere on this site) that Biden is so dumb that when he went senile, his family didn’t even notice.

  58. @Poupon Marx

    The sad thing is, however disgusting Trump is, that would be the best outcome. Next to stuffed shirt Biden, even Trump looks great.

    • Replies: @Wally
  59. annoymous says:
    @Harbinger

    Harbinger.. Every man dies, not every man lives… <=I like your foreign policy..

    The nation state system owes every human person born to this earth the very best life possible.. color, language, intelligence, family background, religion, smell, height, weight, and toe count, sex all make no difference. There is no excuse for those who lead not to honor their obligation to human rights. There is no reason for humans to tolerate a government, any government, for any reason, if the leaders of the government so tolerated do not use the government to provide everyone with the best of life possible. life is just too short for humanity not to demand of those few we humans are forced to accept as our governors to at least use the government to give those they govern the best.

    • Replies: @Harbinger
  60. bjondo says:

    Polls probably taken at
    the homes of Spielberg and DeNiro.

    Trump will win with 68 – 72%.

    If Harris the candidate, she gets 2% max.
    Biden goes home to roll in Ukrainian lucre.
    Gabbard gets Sandered.
    Sanders gets reSandered. No backbone to fight.
    Warren <30%
    Castro, Beto, Buttigig, Booker combined maybe 7%

    Yang interesting. Not sure. 15 – 25%?
    After Trump, he has my vote.

  61. I am definitely not the only one who expects Clinton to be the Dem candidate in 2020.

    https://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-2020-nominee-democratic-party-election-odds-bookmaker-1459931

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  62. Druid says:
    @renfro

    Absolutely disgusting. THEY have not been a force for good overall.

  63. @Rabbitnexus

    Biden for President, Michelle Obama for Veep.

  64. Wally says:
    @AnonFromTN

    said:
    “Next to stuffed shirt Biden, even Trump looks great.”

    Flaws & all, next to any of the current candidates Trump looks great.

  65. Harbinger says:
    @annoymous

    I have to disagree with you.

    The true community, for humanity, is and always has been anarchy – the law of nature, natural law. The nation state is a societal construct. Liberty is also a societal construct in that it is granted freedom that is given and can easily be taken away. The nation state is exactly the same.

    There aren’t such things as ‘human rights’, again a societal construct. Every man and woman is free to do whatever they so choose to do while alive, just to understand that with every action a reaction, every choice a consequence. This is why I repeatedly state that the ten commandments are NOT about control but a self preservation society for humanity. Should you choose to murder, you will bring about the wrath of the loved ones of those you have murdered. It is the same with theft, with adultery, with deceit and so on.

    No man or woman should EVER govern over another, unless of course they be mother and father, or the individual being governed gives full consent.
    No man, or woman should EVER vote for and support government, because governments are nothing more than the employees of corporations. They are controlled organisations that do the bidding of the highest bidder – Rothschild.

    The problem we are in IS because of government. They are the convenient tool of the Jews, that they use to control the lands they parasite within. Many people now know that they are utterly corrupt. Politicians are self serving, sycophants who care not what the people say or want but simply do what they’re told by their globalist, banking masters. And yet no one does anything to bring about justice for the wrongs done, by so many of these people within. Take Tony Blair and George Bush? Both, although puppets of the Rothschilds, brought about the utter obliteration of Iraq, the destruction of a nation. The deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the ruination of millions upon millions of lives. Nothing has been done to bring them to justice for their crimes against humanity and yet, if I say something that society deems inappropriate, the police (another corrupt institution) will arrest me, I’ll be tried in court and fined, at worst imprisoned.

    People deserve the society they live within and they haven’t a clue that if they don’t do something now, to remove what is currently, the future will be a living hell for them. The Christians know this, but they’re loons in that they’re waiting for rapture and actively doing nothing in order to fulfil bible prophecy.

  66. Joe Biden is 77
    Sanders is 78
    Warren (the Indian) is 75

    So these three candidates, they may need a cup of hot tea and go to bed instead dealing with perfidious jews and the terrorist entity so called israel.
    May need also, some incontinence pads for the night.

  67. Good article as usual, Stephen. Biden is, in short, a low IQ clown, and noted plagiarist.

  68. A good comprehensive comment my Adrian E. I like his projection: “… at the moment it does not look as if Tulsi Gabbard could be elected. The best scenario I can imagine is that she has relatively good results in the primaries, but then her delegates support Bernie Sanders, Bernie Sanders is elected and appoints her to an important position like Secretary of State. Such an administration would probably act relatively responsibly – and Tulsi Gabbard might have good chances of becoming president some time in the future”. This projection adds a thrust to Steve Sniegoski’s well-researched article.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Stephen J. Sniegoski Comments via RSS