Defense Experts: Biden’s Memory Loss Could Imperil National Security

(Rallying Patriots) – Due to the recent release of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report concerning President Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents, which went on to describe him as being a “sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory,” many have begun to question how the commander-in-chief could potentially react in future crises situations. My own personal answer to that question is “not good.”

We’ve seen plenty of public examples showcasing Biden’s failing cognitive abilities. From getting presidents of various countries mixed up, believing he’s had conversations with people long dead, to not remembering the years he served as vice president or when his eldest child died. It all points to dementia. If he’s unfit to stand trial, he’s certainly not fit to serve as president. In fact, his remaining in the White House with this sort of deterioration could pose a pretty significant risk to our country.

“Speaking to Fox News Digital, several national security experts shared their thoughts on whether Biden has the ability to serve strongly and decisively as president should a threat to the nation arise during his tenure in the White House,” Fox News reported.

Former Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland asserted that “Biden’s dementia is plain for all to see, but especially for foreign leaders.” She then suggested that this is “dangerous” noting the president’s “irreversible decline” projects weakness on the geopolitical stage.

“That’s dangerous for two reasons. First, it amplifies the claim that America is a spent power. Chinese leaders have been telling the world for years that America is in irreversible decline, that the future belongs to China. Biden is the embodiment of irreversible decline, giving credence to the idea that America’s supremacy on the world stage is over,” said McFarland, who served during former President Donald Trump’s administration.

“Second, because foreign leaders know now is the time to press the U.S., to take advantage of a leader who is not only weak but confused,” McFarland remarked.

When retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg was asked about the president’s ability to lead the country with all of his memory problems, he fired off at the administration saying that Biden has always taken “a long time to make decisions or to do something” when it comes to dealing with those antagonistic to the United States.

“When it comes to national security, you know, it all really comes down to the commander in chief, the president of the United States,” Kellogg, a Fox News contributor, went on to say. “You always want your commander in chief to be, obviously, very informed, which the advisers are supposed to do, but able to make very quick, rational, understandable decisions.”

He then pointed out that small, short delays are pretty par for the course, however, he insisted the long delays from the Biden administration lead to problems.

“Frankly, in this administration, you see the latter, not the former,” he noted. “They take a long time to make decisions or to do something, and that always lets your adversary get inside your ability to do something. Years ago, in the military, there was a term that was actually used that was called the OODA loop. The OODA loop [stood for] observe, orient, decide, act. What that meant is, frankly, get inside your opponent’s decision cycle. That’s what presidents need to do,” he added.

“So, if you’ve got a diminished capacity, your ability to make rapid decisions is, of course, questionable. And that’s where you get into trouble with national security,” Kellogg continued.

Admitting the administration is extremely “risk averse,” he then commented, “When you look at the Middle East, look how long it took us to react to the attack on the Americans or what we’ve done to try to reestablish deterrence. It’s slow decision-making.”

“The reason that’s important is because you force the adversary to do something different,” Kellogg explained. “And the one that makes those decisions is always, ultimately, the president of the United States, who is commander in chief. Is it an issue? Of course it is, but it’s an issue that has just lived with this administration since day one. That is a concern that you have to have when it comes to decision-making and mental acuity.”

A senior fellow and director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, Michael O’Hanlon, divulged that he’s far more concerned about Biden’s abilities with “intellectual flexibility and the ability to take in new information.” He then called upon past events connected with Afghanistan that are mentioned in Hur’s report.

“On the one hand, much of the discussion seems to focus on Afghanistan, and then-Vice President Biden’s role in the debate about what to do in Afghanistan during the Obama administration. There, Biden lost out to advocates of a large surge and probably felt vindicated when that surge did not achieve the desired results,” O’Hanlon stated. “That said, in my view, he remained a bit stuck in his vision of where Afghanistan was when he mistakenly ordered our withdrawal in the opening months of his presidency.”

“And only a very modest U.S. military presence was needed (along with small forces from American allies) to help its government retain control at least of the cities. So, I’m less concerned about memory, per se, and more concerned about intellectual flexibility and the ability to take in new information,” O’Hanlon declared.

He praised Biden for his handling of the Ukraine-Russia war, saying, “He helped Ukraine survive the original Russian attack. He publicized to the world that the attack was imminent so that Putin couldn’t blame it on us or the Ukrainians. He continued to provide more weaponry to Ukraine yet did so without triggering a war with Russia. These are no mean feats, and they took intellectual flexibility and adaptability.”

“Bottom line is that while I wish an 81-year old man weren’t running for president again, I think Biden’s memory and brain are stronger than the recent report alleges,” he concluded.

Apparently, almost bankrupting the U.S. economy, which was still pretty weak from COVID, by sending billions to Ukraine is somehow handling the situation. I don’t think that’s correct.

Copyright 2024.

You may also like...


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here