You seem very determined to take it out of context so again, "international relations don't turn on a dime" was a direct response to sodderboy's statement:
nice deflection
No one to my knowledge claimed allies would come rushing back the second Biden took office, nor did they claim there's a waiting period before criticizing a sitting president's decisions.
The press is clearly on one side
not sweet
By the U.S.? I'll note that no new wars were started 2021-2023 either.
ex-President Trump was very sensible about proper use of the military... He gave the military free hand to do what it takes to vaporize the ISIS Caliphate in Iraq/Syria. Now with the softer US/western posture ISIS and others are reforming in Afghanistan.
According to your Newsweek article, it ebbed until "the
failure in 2019 of the Hanoi Summit, the second meeting between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un" and that "leading up to the Eighth Party Congress [in January 2021] and in the months after it, North Korea 'clearly did a lot of planning and a lot of manufacturing and development, to be able to have all of these systems ready to test back to back throughout this year'".
There is a night and day difference between the posture of rogue nations like N Korea and Iran, not to mention, opposition nations like China and Russia. Since President Biden mishandled Afghanistan withdrawal and other examples of softness. Bad guys don't respect weakness.
If requests to OPEC are "groveling" then yes we were. Trump in February 2019: ""OPEC, please relax and take it easy. World cannot take a price hike -- fragile!" More significantly in 2020, when oil prices crashed (due to the pandemic and the Saudi Arabia/Russia spat) he begged OPEC to increase production.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/03/business/oil-prices-trump-opec/index.htmlI don't consider any of this "groveling" but you might as well be consistent.
interesting choice of words.... Insisting that NATO nations stand up and pay their agreed to funding commitments to NATO, the organization formed to protect them, seems fair, since the US has been paying too much to defend NATO states for way too long.
Ok. This is the fault of Biden because...?
The buck stops with POTUS but he has openly dismissed sensible advice from military advisers and others.
Claiming energy dependence wasn't "wrecked" isn't the same as claiming we are totally independent.
a distinction without a difference.
==
I have watched with concern the multi-pronged attack against the fossil fuel industries, besides presidential XOs (I won't bore the forum with a full list) and regulatory "friction". On top of that ESG investing has denied the fossil fuel industry sufficient working capital to expand resources. I want to give people the benefit of the doubt for having good intentions, but increasingly it seems to be ignorance driven. Thwarting low cost fossil fuels harms the poorest among us.
5 years ago the 15 year old international sensation Greta Thunberg re-tweeted a "scientist's"
claim that the world would end if we don't stop use of fossil fuels in 5 years. Well now she is 20 years old and has deleted her ignorant tweet, but hasn't changer her tune. There is a long list of such claims.
Note that I was replying directly to AnalogPackrat and their repeated context-free reference to June 2019.
JR