09-20-2022, 08:42 PM
(09-20-2022, 08:00 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Biden has also explicitly stated that the Us would step in to defend Taiwan (three times by my count), which has had to be walked back. He has also armed Ukraine pretty aggressively, while, as you have noted, setting some limits to what we will do. We have also crossed those lines on occasion (eg with HIMARS), or have allowed other countries to quietly skirt them (for example, by supplying airplane parts that could be easily reassembled).
BC
FWIW, the “Boil the frog” strategy has thus far armed Ukraine well, caused immense damage to Russian armed forces, all without involving NATO in the war. Despite taking a refreshingly open communication approach about the conflict (especially during the buildup) He’s also shown an ability to keep info under wraps to maximize effect, like with the HARMS.
Could he have gotten away with a more aggressive approach in terms of more:bigger guns faster? Maybe. But it’s not a provable argument. I know I’m rooting for ATACMS, Abrams, F16s et Al, but I’d say this far the administration has earned the benefit of the doubt.
