१८ सप्टेंबर, २०२१
"Calling American and Australian behavior 'unacceptable between allies and partners,' France announced on Friday that it was recalling its ambassadors..."
"... to both countries in protest over President Biden’s decision to provide nuclear-powered submarines to Australia.
It was the first time in the history of the long alliance between France and the United States, dating back to 1778, that a French ambassador has been recalled to Paris in this way for consultations. The decision by President Emmanuel Macron reflects the extent of French outrage at what it has a called a 'brutal' American decision and a 'stab in the back' from Australia.... Australia on Wednesday canceled a $66 billion agreement to purchase French-built, conventionally powered submarines, hours before the deal with Washington and London was announced."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८९ टिप्पण्या:
Imagine what would happen if Trump were President.
CNN would be broadcasting outraged commentary all week.
Interesting.
Time to go find out what really happened from a source that isn't completely dishonest.
According to Mutaman, this happened because Deplorables voted for Trump and no further discussion is required.
If it wasn’t for the French, we never would have won the Revolutionary War.
I thought Biden was going to get all our allies all back on board.
I hope in every college football stadium from Norman, Oklahoma to Ann Arbor, Michigan that the chant goes out today: Fuck Joe Biden.
They had second thoughts about the submarine wine cellar.
Huh, first Britain holds Biden in contempt, now France recalls its ambassador. Boy, I sure am glad we have Biden to restore diplomacy.
The French were milking the Australians for all they were worth. The cost was already 75% over budget, the work was years behind schedule, and none of it was being done in Australia.
Basically France is the international version of Boeing.
According to stories the Biden Regime is just really bad at this talking to people thing.
Biden didn't tell Australia they were pulling out of Afghanistan.
The Regime followed up by offering Australia a great deal on some nuclear subs to make amends.
France already had a nearly 100 billion dollar deal to provide diesel electric subs to Australia.
The US just bigfooted France and Australia bitched out on a signed contract.
A tale as old as time.
Boy I’m glad “the adults are back in charge” in DC. Flushing 233 years of cooperation down in his first year. Way to go Joe!
And that's how Dems define the new normal.
Kill innocent civilians in Afghanistan, let in 200K invaders a month, stiff the French--what's next?
I just ordered bumper stickers from Amazon that say "Fuck Joe Biden".
That Is my response to his administration's gross mismanagement and incompetence.
Gahrie beat me to it. The first I knew of this deal was as an Australian scandal. It had been sold to the public as good for Australian jobs and the economy. But as Gahrie said, the French kept all the work for themselves with cost overruns to boot, and no submarines in sight. Classic French got the mine and the Aussies go the shaft.
I don't blame the Australians for wanting out of this, but did we have to get in the middle?
I thought a French submarine was a sex position.
Biden is a fiend and his handlers are all corrupt a-hoes. so - good for Marcon.
Somethun that might happen if you're skinny dippin'.
70% of France's electricity is produced by nuclear power plants. Their efforts to go green without nuclear power are way behind schedule. France exported nuclear technology to China around 2010 because money. France and China both are ticked off about this deal because money. China doesn't want Australia to have nuclear powered subs. The French were going to sell Australia conventional subs. Plus the Americans have promised to supply COVID masks for the entire Australian navy.
The question should be, "Why did Australia order diesel powered submarines in the first place? Were they anticipating a re-kindling of World War II?"
In other news, the Australian Air Force recently placed an order for 100 DC-3s and 25 B-29s.
Comment dit-on "temper tantrum" en Français?
It was a stab in the back, but "diesel-powered submarine" sounds like something out of the 1940s. Knowing how much military establishments love high tech, it's not surprising those fellas down under wanted to go nuclear.
The French may well have been milking the Aussies, but those subs were due to start arriving in 2027 and the nuclear ones are predicted to start arriving in 2040. I don't think the Chinese are unhappy about that.
Le Monde's complaint: “For any who still doubted it, the Biden administration is no different from the Trump administration on this point: The United States comes first, whether it’s in the strategic, economic, financial or health fields. ‘America First’ is the guiding line of the foreign policy of the White House.” How much did Biden pay for that endorsement?
In partial defense of Australia, who in this day and age would spend $66B on Diesel-powered submarines when there are much better alternatives? Sure, they'll end up with fewer subs via the US/UK deal, but IMO much more appropriate for the times we live in given Chinese aggressiveness. Still, no doubt the French were blindsided by the turn of events.
The Australians had six diesel submarines of the Oberon class built by the British in the 1960s and 70s. The first of these, HMAS Otway, was built in Greenock, Scotland in 1968 and is now a museum.
Sacrebleu!!
If the goal of the new AUKUS alliance is to hem China in the Pacific, why not include France? But then the acronym would have been FAUKUS, and that would have been unfortunate…
But but but Biden is restoring America to it’s great station in the world, to once again be loved by the rest of the world and, and, and no mean tweets…
You fuckers and your dead ancestors voted for this guy. Enjoy the suck!
This is less a story about Biden and the US than about Australia and its corrupt defense procurement bureaucracy. The Australians had a good deal with Japan for a submarine design, then one of their retired DoD equivalent bureaucrats swept in with a "great deal" for a submarine from France. Except it delayed procurement, offered fewer subs, and costs only grew once the deal was signed. If they had stuck with the Japan deal, there would already be new Australian submarines for service. I don't know if this new nuclear sub deal is best for Australia but cutting losses with the French was a good move.
Still, if Macron had done this under Trump, we'd hear about it for months. Then again, if Trump did what Biden did in Afghanistan, he'd already be impeached and removed. Alas, I'd be happy now for some JAG to announce a court martial hearing for Gen. Milley.
is there ANYTHING? That Jo Biden can't f*ck up?
I guess, to be fair; when you consider that Jo Biden is working for his Chinese Masters...
It all kinda makes sense
"Tell Mikey Macron it was only business. I always liked him."
Hey I thought that Trump was the "wrecker of our diplomatic position"! What happened? Is Shufflin Senescent Scranton Joe wrecking our alliances, and downgrading our position in the world? Why yes, it sure looks that way.
Now I'm no fan of France--harboring a lingering resentment against Le Gran Fromage Charles De Gaulle. And it may be that Australia's decision to use American nuclear sub technology was "nothing personal, just business". But I haven't seen enough of the details around the decision to learn what American company would get a taste of the profit here. And in a related question will the "Big Guy" get a chance to dip his beak in the money trough?
Smart move by Biden administration people.
To /balance/ $90B given to China/Taliban ... Get Australian fellow leftists to pay for it. For promised pie in the sky in 2040.!!
Piss off French too.
I'd like to see India pick up the French deal
I would be willing to bet that this sale was initiated during the Trump administration. Like the pull out from Afghanistan Biden benefits from continuing the Trump legacy.
A friend ended a call several weeks back by saying, "Isn't it great to have a President who is respected in the world?"
Next time we talk, we're going to pick up right where we left off.
"France on High Alert!" -- Dave Barry
This is BEYOND HUGE. France is the United States' oldest ally. It's the equivalent of a family member punching you in the face. Recalling an ambassador is only a couple of steps short of severing diplomatic relations altogether and starting hostilities, economic, military or otherwise.
This kind of thing doesn't just go away. It isn't just forgotten come election time. France and our other European allies will look with distrust upon the United States for at least the next four years.
And the world's adversaries and enemies will fill the void.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden goes to the beach for a vacation.
France and many in Europe believe if we all can suck up to the PRC just a little more that everything will be fine.
I saw an AP column earlier today with the title: "One stunning afternoon: Setbacks imperil Biden's reset".
This helpful sentence follows the first paragraph: "The punishing headlines, all within an hour, underscored the perils for any president from the uncontrollable events that can define a term in office."
Uncontrollable events, unless it's a Republican in office.
The adults are back in charge and Joe Biden is a foreign policy genius!
Meanwhile, Joe Biden goes to the beach for a vacation.
....
Contretemps also mean French are back from vacation
The Washington Post ran the recall of the French ambassador on page A6. Like it's no big deal.
According to stories the Biden Regime is just really bad at this talking to people thing
Well, Jen Psaki, with her utter and visible contempt and disregard for others, really does exemplify the entire Administration, doesn't she?
Bob Boyd wins the internet for today.
Interesting parallels for gullible...
Just as Putin not objecting to Trump == collusion, so China frowning at Biden === not Xi's lackey
typingtalker said...
The question should be, "Why did Australia order diesel powered submarines in the first place? Were they anticipating a re-kindling of World War II?"
actually, there's Lots to be said for diesel/electric attack submarines
Since (underwater) the run on batteries, they are MUCH quieter than a nuke plant
So, if you want a sub, to sneak up on a chinese ship, a diesel/electric is useful
On the other hand; if you want a boomer (a underwater missile platform, that can stay submerged for 6 months at a time, you HAVE TO have nuke subs
BUT! Since the Australians DON'T HAVE nuclear weapons, they have Very Little Need, for an underwater missile platform.
The Only use for an Australian sub, is to defend against Chinese ships
As i said, a few expensive (fairly) noisy nuke subs would NOT be as useful to them, as more, quieter, diesel/electric subs.... The ONLY group, that would want them to go that way, would be the Communist Chinese... And their pawns in DC
"But I haven't seen enough of the details around the decision to learn what American company would get a taste of the profit here."
That might be easy to learn- who has recently given Jim and Hunter Biden positions on their corporate boards? What stock has Mr. Nancy Pelosi purchased in this area?
What does it say when averous competition between nations gets ambassadors recalled but a drone strike killing women and children gets hardly a peep of condemnation from the very same allies. We are just stuck with whataboutism Trump.
Can we at least drop this crap about how Trump was some aberration with respect to our foreign relations?
No, I don't suppose we can. Facts don't matter.
The French may well have been milking the Aussies, but those subs were due to start arriving in 2027 and the nuclear ones are predicted to start arriving in 2040. I don't think the Chinese are unhappy about that.
The other part of the deal is the infrastructure to support nuclear attack subs, and basing rights for US nuke attack subs. I'm betting there will be at least a couple Los Angeles class subs based in Australia by 2027 and perhaps a British nuke or two for training purposes. The new subs will probably actually be a version of the British nuclear sub, not US subs. The British nuclear attack sub is more suited to Australia's navy, and the British are currently building the last two of their current class, and will have construction slips quickly available.
This is hilarious...Biden was supposed to be the guy to bring back normalcy at home and abroad.
He was the adult in the room...nations would respect us again.
Afghanistan, covid, the border, drone strikes, inflation, massive tax and spending increases, school closures, defunding the police, huge spikes in crime...
What a clusterfuck.
In partial defense of Australia, who in this day and age would spend $66B on Diesel-powered submarines when there are much better alternatives?
Diesel powered subs are perfectly feasible as attack subs. In fact in a wargame in 2005, a diesel attack sub operated by Sweden managed to sink the USS Reagan. They can be much quieter than a nuclear sub that has pumps that are constantly running, and they are much cheaper to build and operate.
"But I haven't seen enough of the details around the decision to learn what American company would get a taste of the profit here."
That might be easy to learn- who has recently given Jim and Hunter Biden positions on their corporate boards? What stock has Mr. Nancy Pelosi purchased in this area?
As far as the US is concerned, it's going to probably be companies building infrastructure and transferring tech. The subs themselves are going to be built in England.
When the story first broke I didn't know about the French contract to supply subs and wondered if there was some long-standing antipathy between France and Australia, possibly Greenpeace-related, so it's something of a relief to realize that the two countries aren't sworn enemies and it's only our President Magoo's meddling that put them at odds.
Everybody is concentrating on the subs and ignoring the basing rights. Building infrastructure to support nuclear submarine operations and getting more bases for US subs is the key part of the deal. The nuclear subs for Australia and resulting tech transfer is part of the payment for the basing rights as far as we're concerned.
I am an expert in submarine warfare from reading many Tom Clancy books. Diesel electric boats have to run shallow to snorkel air to recharge the batteries. They will be seen by satellites. They are used for coastal defense where they can get to the target on one charge, like in Norway. Australia wants ship killers to hide in the deep pacific to shoot conventional guided missles from underwater to destroy Chinese troop and armor carrying ships along with defending war ships. This makes them safe from invasion, and a few subs are less likely to be found and attacked if they don’t snorkel and run big Diesel engines.
Submariners say that there are two kinds of ship, subs and targets.
So, I wonder who paid off the Biden family, or their correct friends, and how much they paid, so that the US wasn't willing to cut France in on the deal?
The French aren't pissed that teh Aussies are getting nuke subs. The French are pissed the they got aced out of a $66 billion contract, without even crumbs
it takes som serious corruption not to be willing to give them any crumbs
FWBuff said...
If the goal of the new AUKUS alliance is to hem China in the Pacific, why not include France? But then the acronym would have been FAUKUS, and that would have been unfortunate…
Or AUSFUK, which probably would have been even more unfortunate!
What am I missing? Why is this bad? I think it's good.
The French are in a snit? That's very sad. They'll get over it. Meanwhile America sells some boats and our allies in the region will be better equipped to support our interests.
Howard's probably right when he says, "I would be willing to bet that this sale was initiated during the Trump administration." But if Biden is responsible for this then kudos to the MFPOS.
Blogger Howard said...
I would be willing to bet that this sale was initiated during the Trump administration
Hilarious. Howard goes from mind reading to military secrets without leaving home. Trump must have done it. It couldn't be Biden's incompetence.
France is just mad that they lost out on $100 billion is sales of conventional submarines. Just another crooked politico.
But France has a huge arsenal and relies on nuclear energy more than any other western nation. Plus the free speech thing.
Oh well. Let em' drown knee deep in their beloved "refugee" Muslim misogynists and terrorists. It's just their daughters and wives and some old Jews they're sacrificing.
I also remember when the literally Kremlin-trained progs took over New Zealand and demanded that we put our warships 100 miles off coast in international water but still not entirely leave because the Chinese would over-run their country faster than you can say Marmite.
Screw 'em all. I'm tired of losing my friends and neighbors to defending this sort of garbage.
yes i think this was roaming alot on gmail.com and on gmail sign up. but this was not based on facts.
I would be willing to bet that this sale was initiated during the Trump administration. Like the pull out from Afghanistan Biden benefits from continuing the Trump legacy.
I think Jim Acosta is posting on this blog. He has the right combination of arrogance and stupidity to say something like this.
On our alliance with France - we never assisted in the wars of the French Revolution and were really late to the Franco-Prussian War, like not at all.
On Australia going for nuclear powered boats, the best time to decide that was 20 years ago, the next best time is now. Further thoughts - the upgrading of an Australian navy base to handle nuke boats will be beneficial to both the Royal Navy and the USN, and with the RN sending a carrier east of Suez, the Chinese naval challenge is being met.
I don't like the Biden administration, but this is a good thing all the way around - except for a French shipyard.
gilbar writes, "Actually, there's Lots to be said for diesel/electric attack submarines...
The Royal Austrailian Navy has been operating six Collins-class diesel boats. Compared to contemporary submarines designed by Swedish and German builders the Collins submarines are first-rate warships. However, practical experience has shown their performance to be sub-par to RAN requirements.
Australia is a island continent that has not been blessed with an abundance of deep-water ports, particularly along its northern coast. Consequently, the 70-day endurance of the Collins-class has been an unacceptable tactical hinderance to submarine patrols in the South China Sea, the cockpit of potential war in the Pacific. Furthermore, there have been numerous incidents over the last decade of Chinese ASW aircraft intercepting RAN submarines while snorkeling at periscope depth.
Australian politics have been roiled repeatedly by controveries and scandals connected to the Collins-class program, the first submarines designed and built by Australian shipyards, and its proposed successor, the confusingly named Attack-class program. The RAN has been hostile to the Labour government's proposal to adopt a conventional version of the French Barracuda-class fast attack submarine for the obvious reason that such a vessel would still be tied to surface and therefore just as vulnerable to enemy ASW aircraft. Non-nuclear air-independent submarines currently in development in Germany and Japan have piqued the interest of some civilian members of the Department of Defence, but others point out the unproven character of these projects compared to the USN's outstandingly positive experience with nuclear propulsion.
Sure, everyone should ignore China, defer to the business interests of France, and refuse military tech from the greatest military superpower the world has ever known.
Quelle bonne blague!
I assume France is actually doing this to ensure future favorable dealings or a nice immediate payout.
I would be willing to bet...
Poor Howard. Imagine going through life living a fantasy and clutching at straws in a vain effort to keep that extended delusion from exploding in one's face.
Picture young Howard pioneering a sad career of lame excuses:
TEACHER: Well, Howie, where's your assignment? Don't tell me, the dog ate it again?
HOWARD: No, ma'am. This time it was a dragon.
gilbar wrote in part ... "actually, there's Lots to be said for diesel/electric attack submarines ... "
And lots I didn't know.
The MESMA anaerobic system external link will change the Scorpene’s ability to operate underwater for sustained periods without having to surface. An AM-2000 is still not in the same league as SSN nuclear subs which can do this indefinitely, but it is a substantial improvement that reduces “indiscretion time” on the surface where the sub can be spotted by radar, and also heard more easily by underwater sensors. A CM-2000 Scorpene can operate underwater for 4-6 days without surfacing or snorkelling to get oxygen to recharge its batteries. An AM-2000 Scorpene, in contrast, will be able to operate for up to 18 days, depending on variables like speed, etc.
Basically, the MESMA approach is closed-cycle steam turbine derivative of French nuclear-propulsion experience using non-nuclear steam generation. A conventional Rankine-cycle turbo-alternator is powered by steam generated from the combustion of ethanol (grain alcohol) and stored oxygen at a pressure of 60 atmospheres. This pressure-firing allows exhaust carbon dioxide to be expelled overboard at any depth without an exhaust compressor.
Each MESMA system costs around $50-60 million, as they require adding a new 8.3 meter (27 foot), 305 tonne hull section to the submarine.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/india-looks-to-modify-scorpene-subs-with-mesma-aip-propulsion-01954/
I don't know for sure if this is the system that Australia had committed to buy but it shows what is available and what I didn't know. I love this internet-thing.
An interesting read out from OZ:
“But Australia has no domestic nuclear power industry — an essential component of a country in possession of nuclear submarines.”
The high cost, as well as taboos about nuclear power, meant Australia stuck with diesel-electric submarines. Cost is an important issue at play with the new submarine plan. It means a deal worth $90 billion with French manufacturer Naval Group — hindered by interminable delays and ballooning costs — will be torn up. That could cost taxpayers $400 million (at least).
And given the costs involved in developing nuclear submarines — around twice as much as diesel-electric ones — there needs to be far greater clarity about what they’re going to be used for, says Richard Tanter, a senior research associate at the Nautilus Institute and honorary professor in political science at the University of Melbourne.
“The argument over what Australia should be doing with the submarines really has to be addressed,” Tanter said.
“It strengthens the likelihood that we’ll be spending a huge amount of money on something that doesn’t meet our defence needs.”
The French did more than just help us in the AmRev--their demands and conditions largely determined the final decision of the rebels to go for the big prize of independence when they did.
No WAY were they going to commit to a possible war with Britain, however satisfying in itself, on behalf of some backwoods tax protesters who could either be crushed or bribed in the usual way. They wanted to see all the rebels' skins' in the game. (See Ferreiro, Brothers in Arms.)
That said, the French weren't in it for the love of liberty. And I understand why they'd be shouting (pardon my French) "Foutre Joe Biden" but cest la vie.
This really has nothing to do with submarines, so don't take your eye off the ball here.
This is all about Biden -- once again -- taking unilateral action without bothering to notify what is supposed to be our friend, and in the process completely f*cking that friend in the a** without warning.
Contracts and submarines and strategic defense are sideshows. The issue is diplomacy and the U.S.'s standing in the international arena and how it is now official policy to sh*t on our friends and allies whenever, and as often as, possible.
It's fun to watch all the asinine tropes left over from the last twenty years of foreign policy discussion ("our oldest ally", etc.) get used on a Democrat.
But let's be clear, here. If you think the US "military-industrial complex" is a cozy relationship, well, US defense contractors and the US government are a couple that's filed for divorce and engaged in a vicious custody battle, compared to the connubial bliss of French defense contractors and the French government.
So, our French couple thought they had a nice, fat, juicy defense contract they could run up the overruns on, and then they lost it because of the actions of people they've been resenting for a long, long time ("les Anglo-Saxons", the stereotype-laden French term for the English-speaking countries as an undifferentiated collective). In response the French couple is throwing a hissy fit.
where are all the wise ol' greybeards pontificating about "The importance of alliances". Where's the statement from George Bush and Mittens?
So sad, we shouldn't be insutling our noble allies.
The frog deal inked in 2016 and the US/UK deal revealed in 2021. You numbnuts think a deal of this magnitude could have been pulled off by dementia sleepy China Joe in 9-months?
rcocean: "where are all the wise ol' greybeards pontificating about "The importance of alliances". Where's the statement from George Bush and Mittens?"
If George "The Walrus" Conway could find the inner strength and "fortitude" to stop providing cover to pedophiles and tear himself away from the endless trips to the buffet (have you seen the desert section!), he could provide the "insight" necessary for LLR Chuck to cut and paste on this subject.
hstad said...
France is just mad that they lost out on $100 billion is sales of conventional submarines. Just another crooked politico.
Politicians trying to get bunnies for their countries is what they're supposed to do!
Am I bothered by the US / UK getting the contract? Of course not.
Am I bothered that hte incompetent Biden* Admin got it by surprising and pissing off one of the "major allies" that the Democrats say they like?
Yes, I am.
This should have been a 4 way deal, including France, rather than a 3 way deal. That it isn't indicates taht someone in the Biden* Admin got greedy, and / or corrupt
Howard said...
The frog deal inked in 2016 and the US/UK deal revealed in 2021. You numbnuts think a deal of this magnitude could have been pulled off by dementia sleepy China Joe in 9-months?
-------
are we sure AUKUS is for real? no optics evidence ?
I guess the “adults” still aren’t yet in charge?
"The frog deal inked in 2016 and the US/UK deal revealed in 2021. You numbnuts think a deal of this magnitude could have been pulled off by dementia sleepy China Joe in 9-months"
Donald, Donald, Donald! Why is everything always about Donald?!
Seriously, the French apparently blame Biden because they withdrew their ambassador on his watch. But what the hell do they know that snarky commenters don't?
Howard: "The frog deal inked in 2016 and the US/UK deal revealed in 2021. You numbnuts think a deal of this magnitude could have been pulled off by dementia sleepy China Joe in 9-months?"
Orange Man made Biden do something.
Again.
And always.
Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like a good deal for US national security as a bulwark against growing Chinese naval adventurism. Trying to give Trump administration some props. They did some things well.
You guys can't see past your hurt Ego's because you are still suffering from the stolen erection.
"Maybe I'm wrong"
You are and about a number of things. First, the original deal with the French was (in part) to counter the Chinese. That is, if it had gone through, you get the same strategic gains.
2nd, the French were butt hurt enough to recall their ambassador. That is we pissed off a major ally enough to cause a significant diplomatic roe. Had this happened under Orange the Clown, I suspect we would have seen any number of snarky comments from any number of people about what a boneheaded move Trump had done this time, and they'd be right.
3rd, one does not have to believe in stolen elections to see just what a cluster fuck the current administration is turning out to be. Pointing out its imperfections doesn't require one to worship at the church of Trump, but nice try on the distraction.
Howard: "Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like a good deal for US national security as a bulwark against growing Chinese naval adventurism. Trying to give Trump administration some props. They did some things well."
Your after the fact admissions to things you vehemently denied for years, and only offered because reality forces you to, garners you no brownie points.
You have simply migrated your serial lies to other issues.
Exit questions to test your newly found "integrity": Are there over 10,000 Haitian illegal immigrants being held under an overpass in Texas? Or do you still assert that claim is a "conspiracy theory"? If you agree they are there, do you accept that it is Dementia boy's policies the got them there?
FYI: cubans escaping the commies are immediately returned with no consideration by our democratical/LLR-lefty "elites"......for obvious reasons.
The deal with Australia and the UK sounds good, but it also sounds like we swooped in on a major ally and undercut a $90 billion contract shortly before an election. That's no way to make friends.
If we'd helped France find a new buyer for the subs, maybe this could have been a four- or five way alliance.
Also, not to be crass, but is the AUKUS agreement anything new, or just a formalization of existing arrangements? In any hypothetical dispute with China in the South China Sea, either the UK and Australia are already on our side or it's time to seriously rethink things.
Consider how much better we'd like this deal if Japan or Indonesia were buying the French subs. It seems like the Biden administration passed up a really big win to lock up a small win at an ally's expense.
The more I think about it, the more I think that failing to find a buyer for the French subs was a major loose end.
How much would we hate it if China offered to buy them? We'd end up vetoing the deal and looking even worse.
Howard said...
The frog deal inked in 2016 and the US/UK deal revealed in 2021. You numbnuts think a deal of this magnitude could have been pulled off by dementia sleepy China Joe in 9-months?
"Numbnuts"?
Howard, exactly how stupid do you have to be to even try to claim that the dementia sleepy Biden* Admin felt itself bound by anything the Trump Admin did?
That shit won't float.
The reason why it was announced now is because the Biden* Admin was happy with the agreement that they had. If they weren't happy with it, they could have kept on negotiating. If they wanted to bring the French in, they could have done that.
This, like everything else they've don't since taking over from the far more competent Trump Admin, is entirely and completely on them.
You voted for it, you got it. if you're not happy with what you got, that's your own fucking fault.
It's not Trump's fault. It's not our fault. it's not the GOP's fault.
It's the fault of you, and the other Democrats.
If you don't like that, bitch at the people responsible. Starting with yourself
Hoo boy they must be mad, going straight to recalling their ambassadors, without even pausing first to fart in our general direction.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा