If Biden isn’t going to be removed, can he at least go back to not answering questions?
I think it would be better that way.
Biden on Wednesday called Putin a “war criminal” for the first time, upping American rhetoric and jumping ahead of a legal process that can take years.
“I think he is a war criminal,” Biden told reporters at an event at the White House….
The Senate on Tuesday unanimously passed a resolution backing a war crimes investigation into Putin and Russian forces.
The bipartisan resolution urged the International Criminal Court in The Hague and other nations to launch an investigation of war crimes committed by the Russian military during its invasion of Ukraine.
Actually, Biden initially seemed to say that Putin isn’t a war criminal, and then changed his mind:
The headline doesn’t mention that he first said “no,” then seems to have thought better of it and came back to change his answer.
The issue I have with all of this is that, in addition to the seeming vacillation within just a few moments, no good can come of it. The point isn’t whether Putin actually is a war criminal or not. He may very well be. But one of our goals should be to give Putin the opportunity for some sort of face-saving exit. Whether he would avail himself of such an exit is anyone’s guess, but it has to be something he at least thinks is open to him. That he has already been judged a war criminal can only have the effect of making him figure he may as well act that way even if he hasn’t already. Why not continue the war as brutally as possible, if he’s already going to be judged as a war criminal?
Biden’s remark also gives Putin the golden opportunity to accuse Biden of having been a war criminal, and his spokesman predictably did something of the sort:
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the Biden’s statement “unacceptable and unforgivable rhetoric on the part of the head of a state whose bombs have killed hundreds of thousands of people around the world,” according to Russian state news agency TASS.
I’m not even big on what Congress did in terms of asking for a war crimes investigation of Putin. At this point it’s premature and all it does is up the ante and make it harder for Putin to come up with an exit strategy. Maybe he doesn’t want one, but it’s worth it to give him a chance, and there’s nothing to be gained from screaming “war criminal” at this early date. Do people think he’ll desist from bombing civilians if we call him names?
I was curious what exactly a “war criminal” is. The UN has a page the 1949 Geneva Convention definition. There’s a lot of ambiguity. For example point 2
b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;
At this point do we know that Putin definitely ordered the intentional killing of a bunch of civilians? I mean, wouldn’t you have to have testimony by Russian officers who recieved and carried out such an order?
That’s the problem with having a puppet for President. He still gets to do President-like things. I’m sure Jen Psaki would like to be able to just give a blanket statement every time Biden says something stupid, something like “look you know and I know that Joe isn’t really in control so don’t take his ramblings seriously”.
But she can’t say that because everybody still has to pretend that Joe is fully in control after winning the most secure election in American history.
Never underestimate Brandon’s ability to f things up.
BHO’s most honest, and his only, historic statement.
Gregory Harper @ 11:13:
That is such an astute comment. I want to share it, if that is OK.
If yes: do you want me to use your name, or simply something like “from a smart acquaintance”?
By the same lights, I’m sure Biden and American soldiers are military criminals.
War is messy. Remember how Joe murdered that guy and his family in Afghanistan?
It is curious how the Party of Peace (and also the effete Euro politicians) who always wring their hands and call for a cease fire are now insistently throwing gasoline on the flames. Would it be a conspiracy theory for someone to wonder if a war with Russia was desired (or at least not unwelcome) and this is according to plan?
Inconvenient fact: The United States is not a party to the 1998 treaty (the “Rome Statute”) establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC), so we really have no standing to bring charges there against anyone. The primary US concern up until now has been that the ICC would be used to bring politically motivated charges against US military personnel, which is the main reason we never ratified the treaty.
The primary US concern up until now has been that the ICC would be used to bring politically motivated charges against US military personnel, which is the main reason we never ratified the treaty.
AF JAG retired:
Right and right.
Back when I was on the left, there was endless gnashing of teeth that we couldn’t take the US to the ICC court in the Hague.
On the ICC, it gets even better. Up until now, both Republican and Democratic administrations, and the Congress, have consistently held that the ICC cannot try American military personnel because the US is not a party to the ICC Statute. As it happens, neither Russia nor Ukraine are parties to the Statute either. Even Putin would be justified in pointing out the blatant hypocrisy of Congress now asking the ICC to investigate the head of government of a non-party.
AF JAG, good point there. I suppose that this Senate resolution must be taken in the same spirit as some of the hypocritical sanctions that have been imposed lately: yes, action X on our part is hypocritical, but we hate Putin, so it’s all okay.
On the one hand, I’m still a little baffled by this seeming animus toward Putin specifically. Is it simply that he doesn’t care to knuckle under to us? What is the real motivator here? There seems to be something very personal between him and the Marionette that I’m not grasping.
As for this business now about labeling Putin a war criminal in some almost-official sense within the U. S. government, I think Neo has a good point that Putin’s reaction to something along these lines will probably include a sort of resignation about it on his part. I would be concerned, too, about a dollop of desperation on a personal level, since it may then occur to Mr. Putin that the last time this business about ‘war criminal’ was bandied about with respect to a European head of state, it was Milosevic’ head on the chopping block, and Putin surely will be very familiar with that scenario. To what lengths will he fear that the West may go to recapitulate, and to what lengths will Putin himself feel he has to go to avoid same?
My plotline for the political thriller movie is:
(1) Putin and “Biden” are running a theater op; threats to Russia are to be “reacted” to as if they are real, both admins knowing they are not; case in point is the ICC – neither one is at risk there, and they know it, but the rubes are impressed.
(2) The real war is between rival oligarchs, not necessarily along national lines – my “sniff test” for that was the speed with which Western corporations bailed out of Russian holdings at supposedly high cost – but what if they knew something that makes Russia a bad investment right now, and loved having an excuse to cut their potential losses and also get virtue signaling points?
(3) Maybe they thought the “fix” was in with Zelenskyy, and then he decided not to throw the fight after all (I really really don’t want to find out he’s been running a double-secret-agent op against Ukraine all this time).
(4) Where is the anti-war left that always shows up to protest and sing stirring emotional songs, or shout blasé slogans that haven’t changed since Vietnam – because we know they are a sub-department of Democrats Inc.
Oh, right – answered my own question. Call for Cindy Sheehan on line 3 – from the GOP.
I’m sure there are more plot twists in store.
The only people I’m rooting for are the civilians in Ukraine, and anti-Putin protesters in Russia.
However, I’m still okay with Glory to Ukraine over Dasvidaniya, Komrad.
They need to hole him up in Delaware, and make him STFU.
I agree with Gregory but that would while stating really destroy the charade
Super easy to call someone a war criminal. And then retract. And then retract the retraction. Ad Infinitum.
It feeds and fuels the Narrative(TM).
And distracts, fabulously, in fact.
Which is the WHOLE point.
It’s not even “leading from begin”. It’s “leading from nowhere”.
But then there are other far more pressing goals to accomplish…
Oops, “begin” should be “behind”….
AesopFan on point 2, I’ve noticed the same. I’ve heard statements that this invasion of Ukraine was horrendous and unprecedented, yet it happened in 2014 (also 2008) and many western oligarchs simply made new deals with Russia.
However, I’m still okay with Glory to Ukraine over Dasvidaniya, Komrad.
–AesopFan
Although e.e. cummings was known for his experimental poetry and bohemian ways, he was quite disillusioned with the Soviet Union after visiting. He became a Republican and even supported Joseph McCarthy.
_______________________________
kumrads die because they’re told)
kumrads die before they’re old
(kumrads aren’t afraid to die
kumrads don’t
and kumrads won’t
believe in life)and death knows whie
(all good kumrads you can tell
by their altruistic smell
moscow pipes good kumrads dance)
kumrads enjoy
s.freud knows whoy
the hope that you may mess your pance
every kumrad is a bit
of quite unmitigated hate
(travelling in a futile groove
god knows why)
and so do i
(because they are afraid to love
–e.e. cummngs
_______________________________
I don’t recognize the form beyond three sestets with aabccb rhyme scheme. cummings’ poems may look odd on the page but often enough the poems follow classic forms such as the sonnet.
Name calling is not a good way to deescalate a situation. And we can be sure that upon hearing himself called a “War Criminal” by Biden, Putin didn’t think, “damn, he’s right, I need to get out of Ukraine!”. So all this talk is directed at you and me to rile us up and, presumably, secure our support for further actions against Russia, including military ones.
Other than Macron and Israel, who is attempting to work with Putin to find out what it will take to get him out of Ukraine? If someone is doing this then all we can say is they have so far failed spectacularly. Perhaps I’m just naive about foreign policy and international relations.
Marv:
Of course you can share my comment in any way you would like.
Does wrongly droning a family van in Kabul warrant “war criminal” status? asking for a friend, Joe.
Ah, you found yourself totally justified in ordering that strike. Gotchya.
The term ‘war criminal’ has been used so loosely and promiscuously it ought to be retired.
RE: “The headline doesn’t mention that he [Brandon] first said “no,” then seems to have thought better of it and came back to change his answer.”
Or someone reminded him what he was supposed to say.
The puppet got re-directed.
Remove Ol’ Slojoe you get Kammy. Remove Kammy you get Nancy.
We’re looking at a regression – perhaps to infinity.
Biden will be responsible for the fall of hitler 2.0 putin, he will be one of the most consequential president ever, lucky joe. A lot of people hate putin just as much as anyone but somehow they appear to be rooting for him is that they don’t want biden to get this win… a bit like democrats rooting for more covid death and an economic collapse in 2020 because they wanted trump to take the blame and loses, and they got their wishes. but it’s looking more and more likely this will turn out to be an enormous win for this admin, can’t see putin coming back from this.
According to yesterday’s summary at the Institute for Studying War, Russian forces may have used all their “smart” missiles which were designated for the Ukraine conflict and are now therefore using indiscriminate bombing, which is more likely to hit civilian targets. Analysts don’t know if this means all their cruise missiles, or just the portion allotted to the Ukraine action.
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-17
I agree that it would be smarter at this time to refrain from trying to close off any face-saving exits which might be available to Putin. Do they actually want a larger war?
Tangential:
Many of our elected officials have gotten into the habit of condemning American citizens without due process. There should be tremendous outrage when this is done, especially since so many of them have law degrees and most are still members of a state bar.
The presumed innocence of all Americans should be sacrosanct, and our elected officials should be held to the highest standard in upholding and defending that inherent right.
Gregory Harper,
The Presidential Press Secretary was intended to be an advocate for us, the citizens of the U.S., not a modern day Goebbels shucking and jiving through every press conference to prop up any absurdity the Chief Executive may say or do.
The office should be abolished. It’s been a joke for decades.
Do they actually want a larger war?
I think Democrats would like this to continue until the election but don’t want to say so.
Rufus T. Firefly, it does seem that the Press Secretary’s daily briefings serve no useful function. Any policy statements and presidential schedules can be posted online. A president who took weekly questions from the press (in which serious questions were asked and answered) would be more than enough.
Stephanie Grisham had the right idea. Briefings by the President’s press secretary are worse that useless.
Leland:
The scale and destructiveness of the present invasion is quite different.
Recall how they used Trump’s words on Putin et al as evidence of collusion. But we know what Trump’s actions were, and there is no reason to personalize things with insults.
Biden is desperate to improve polling, and every thing he does is about that.
…t’s looking more and more likely this will turn out to be an enormous win for this admin, can’t see putin coming back from this.
I doubt that very seriously. First of all, there is far too much corruption involved to keep many many dollars from chasing profits in Russia when it is no longer politically incorrect to do so. Second, I’d say its even money whether this ends badly, long term, for Russia / Putin, or it pushes Russia and China closer together and ends the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, thus having this end far worse for the US than anyone else.
If that’s a “win” for the administration, I’d rather lose as well.