By New York Post (Opinion) | Created at 2024-11-21 22:20:07 | Updated at 2024-11-22 05:29:19
7 hours ago
The Issue: President Biden permitting Ukraine to use US-supplied long-range missiles against Russia.
It’s interesting that President Biden, in his lame-duck phase, has seemingly emerged from his “nap on the beach” to authorize Ukrainian strikes using US-made missiles in Russian territory (“US & Kyiv strike a blow,” Nov. 20).
Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump is expected to approach the Ukraine-Russia conflict in a more peaceful manner.
Will Biden leave Trump with an ongoing war?
Probably.
Biden’s actions seem to mirror someone at a bar who hears “last call” and lines up all their drinks before the doors close: He appears intent on causing as much damage as possible before leaving office.
A pardon for his son, Hunter, might not be far behind.
Donna Skjeveland
Holbrook
It seems that Joe Biden is saving his meanest, nastiest foreign-affairs decisions for his last days in office.
This past weekend, Joe approved Ukrainian use of American-made long-range missiles to attack Russia.
This upset Vladimir Putin, as it was our first OK of such long-range use of hardware for Ukraine at a time when Russia is taking fairly major casualties.
Washington insiders have long judged Biden as inept in foreign policy matters.
But few claimed he had an evil side to him.
His gift to Trump is a real “gotcha,” one for which Trump will not send a thank you card.
Richard Klitzberg
Boca Raton, Fla.
Another lethal blunder on Biden’s pathetic 50-year foreign-policy record.
The Trump administration will show the world how we can live in peace, showing American might with peace achieved through strength.
Where are NATO, the United Nations and the European Union?
Their current efforts have come up short.
There’s been so much death and destruction under Biden.
J.R. Cummings
Manhattan
Biden has been wrong on every major decision on foreign policy since he’s been in office.
First, he would only allow Ukraine to use our planes and missiles for defensive purposes: wrong.
Now, in his brilliance, he’s decided it can use them anyway it wants.
This is nothing but an escalation just before the new president takes office.
Philip Vallone
Ossining
The Issue: Vice President Kamala Harris’ $1.5 billion campaign spending spree.
Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign spent over $1 billion trying to convince us that she represents the average middle-class American (“Kam burnt cash to fuel jets,” Nov. 17).
We all heard over and over about how she grew up in a middle-class household and would stand and fight for us, the hard-working middle class.
Yet where did her billion-dollar war chest go?
It has been reported that Oprah and Beyonce were each paid $1 million to make campaign appearances.
Yet Beyonce did not even sing.
Stewart Hochler
East Meadow
Let the celebrities Harris paid take up a contribution from the elites to cover her campaign debt.
I am part of the army of small-money Trump donors who don’t want to bail them out.
Pat Swick
Manahawkin, NJ
Harris raised $1 billion for her election effort.
She did not win the election, and the campaign ended in debt.
Trump’s budget was substantially less.
He was more available to the voters, he accomplished his goal and likely has a surplus.
By this metric alone, we see that the country made the right choice for the person who should be in charge of our federal budget.
Paul D. Wildey
East Haven, Conn.
Want to weigh in on today’s stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@nypost.com. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.
