I wish Sen. Joe Biden was president right now

What do you think he could do that the current President isn't doing?

T
T, have you ever read his advice or listed to him on TV where he has stated what would work to get the mess under control? I understand that you don't like to acquaint yourself with Democrat thought, but he might make sense to you since he is the ranking member of the foreign relations committee and is highly respected by Republican chairman Lugar. They are much in agreement with Biden's advice to Bush.

BBB

Usually you have a font of links. Can you bring some up?

Biden
http://biden.senate.gov/

You can read transcripts of media interviews or his own position papers. Just click away.

This Meet the Press interview included McCain and Biden - good stufff.

http://biden.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=221862

Excerpt:

"SEN. BIDEN: About the same as John. I would make this about the Iraqi people, not about us. Look, it's real simple. Why are we there? We're there now to make sure the Iraqis end up with a government. What kind of government? One that's secure, its own borders, is representative, is not a threat to its neighbors and does not have weapons of mass destruction. How do you get there? You get there by an election.

An election is going to take place, hopefully in November or December of 2005. What do you need to do that? You need more security and more legitimacy. Right now, 82 percent of the people don't want us there. This new government we're going to get, they're not going to be happy if they wake up on July the 1st and there are still 138,000 Americans and no one else. We need a contact group. We need to get to the major powers and, say, "Look, here's the deal, guys. Sign on to Brahimi's plan. Help us pass a resolution that is a NATO-led multilateral force to be in place for Iraq," giving an excuse to the Iraqi government to be able to cooperate.

And those who say NATO will not cooperate, I met with five four-stars for a two-hour conversation yesterday, with Jim Jones. If the president will lead, if the president gets on a plane and/or summons or asks the major European leaders to come here, NATO will authorize the use of NATO forces.

MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe President Bush should reach out to Russian President Putin, French President Chirac, German Chancellor Schroeder, and meet with them?

SEN. BIDEN: Absolutely. Positively. This is about presidential leadership. That's what it takes. It needs a president. I don't believe this is lost. I believe it will be lost if the president does not lead.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator McCain, should the president embark on such a mission, meeting with Putin, Chirac and Schroeder?

SEN. BIDEN: As well as Blair.

SEN. McCAIN: I think he should. I think he should at every opportunity and I think that we should encourage more U.S. participation, but at this point I disagree with my friend Joe. I think the likelihood of that happening is not good. We have to increase U.S. troop strength to do the jobs that's necessary.

SEN. BIDEN: I agree. "

BBB

I wish Forbes or Keyes were president right now.

Lord Yes----I frankly don't see how Biden can be a Democrat-----he's got way too much sense-----AND I supported McCain before he got ousted by Bush.

I also think Lieberman is a true statesman-----he called for partisanship to cease more than once.

Biden, president? Why would we want a president that speaks English?

So essentially Senator Biden agreed with everything GWB said in his speech last night. Good for him.

(Biden might have won the Democratic nomination back when he ran for president if it hadn't been for that pesky plagarism scandal he got himself into.)

Foxfyre
Foxfyre, sorry, nice try. Trying to start a rumor that Biden agreed with Bush's plan? Part of it maybe, but hardly all. Bush seems to only know how to delegate, not to lead as Biden advises. Trouble is, to delegate you have to have people who know what to do, and Colin Powell et al are the only ones who know what to do and they've been overridden by Cheney, Rumsfeld et al.

BBB

Flurry of high-profile meetings could help or hurt Bush
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
Flurry of high-profile meetings could help or hurt Bush
By Ronald Brownstein
Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON ?- From Rome to Istanbul, President Bush faces a diplomatic gantlet in June that could burnish his image as an international leader or provide new ammunition for Sen. John Kerry's charge that he has isolated the United States in the world.

With anxiety over Iraq dominating the presidential race, an unusual concentration of international summits offers Bush probably his best opportunity before Election Day to highlight his credentials as a world leader on a stage unavailable to Kerry, his presumptive Democratic challenger.

But next month's events ?- a commemoration of the 60th anniversary of D-Day in France; a gathering of leaders of the world's top industrialized nations on Sea Island, Ga.; U.S.-European Union talks in Ireland; and a NATO summit in Turkey ?- also present Bush with unusual risks, many analysts agree.

If the meetings do not produce much tangible help on Iraq or reveal continuing tension with traditional allies, they could reinforce Kerry's central foreign-policy argument against Bush: that he has alienated too many other nations, leaving the United States bearing too much of the burden in Iraq.

"If ... the feeling is that things are harmonious, that will play to Bush's advantage," said Steven Kull, director of the University of Maryland's program on International Policy Attitudes. "But if information comes back about demonstrations ?- about criticism and hostility ?- and the image of the world being critical of us grows, that could significantly hurt him."

International summits often have been perfunctory and predictable events. In an election year, such meetings have provided presidents a relatively low-risk opportunity to emphasize a "stature gap" with challengers by spotlighting their role as a global leader.

But because this year's presidential race is revolving so much around foreign policy in general ?- and Iraq in particular ?- analysts in both parties believe the pressure on Bush to produce concrete achievements may be higher than usual.

"If these opportunities come and go without more help (on Iraq), it is going to be a disaster," said one Republican activist close to the Bush campaign. "He's selling himself as a leader. But right now, who's he leading?"

Richard Holbrooke, ambassador to the United Nations under President Clinton and a top foreign-policy adviser to Kerry, said the meetings offer Bush "a tremendous opportunity" to rebuild ties abroad and polish his foreign-policy credentials at home.

But Holbrooke said that if Bush returns empty-handed on Iraq, especially from the NATO summit, "I would say he's failed again."

Adding to the stakes for Bush is the timing. These gatherings will occur as the administration is in the process of transferring sovereignty to an interim Iraqi government and trying to win a U.N. resolution blessing the handoff.

Administration officials and European diplomats are cautiously optimistic about reaching consensus on a resolution, which should give Bush an important victory during this period of intense scrutiny. Kerry's case against Bush, however, could be bolstered if the talks on the resolution bog down.

Beyond the substance of the meetings, the month's whirlwind of diplomatic activity may provide powerful symbols that shape the campaign debate.

Images from the D-Day commemoration on June 6 in Normandy, France, could suggest reconciliation between Bush and European leaders who will join him at the event. The occasion also could allow the president to link the struggle in Iraq with American valor during World War II.

On the other hand, Bush's visits to Rome and Paris en route to Normandy and his trip to Istanbul in late June expose him to the risk of large protests.

Italian opposition parties are organizing demonstrations against Bush. In Paris, left-leaning groups also have called for protests against Bush, but observers there say it is unclear how much of a response they will generate ?- especially against the backdrop of the celebration of America's role in liberating France from Nazi Germany.

Administration officials and foreign diplomats are optimistic that the leaders of industrial nations meeting at the G-8 summit in Georgia will approve a Bush proposal for a Greater Middle East Initiative aimed at encouraging democratic reform in the Islamic world.

It also appears likely that NATO will approve the so-called Istanbul Cooperative Initiative, which seeks to expand military ties between the alliance and Middle Eastern countries, officials say.

But meeting Bush's most-pressing political need ?- producing more immediate help in Iraq ?- may be far more difficult.

At hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, senior administration officials acknowledged it was unlikely NATO would provide significant numbers of troops or accept an operational role in Iraq, as Kerry has urged.

"We'd love to see a larger NATO role," testified Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. "(But) I don't think anybody is going to want to put a lot of troops into Iraq until the killing stops."

No, I don't follow Senator Biden. In fact, I know next to nothing about him. But the portion of the interview you posted looks suspiciously like the Coalition's plans for progress in Iraq. I haven't seen any plans to use NATO, but since we have a multinational Coalition in Iraq right now I'm not sure why we would need NATO. As for "reaching out" to other countries, IIRC that's been happening all along. Supposedly the President talked with Chirac just yesterday.

What was said in the interview was similar to saying the house should be painted a light blue instead of a dark blue, and then calling that better leadership.

That was my point. Biden's plan that BBB put out there is almost point for point what GWB included in his speech last night.