Biden, known for being the most stupidest [sic] Vice President in the history of our nation, is quite prone to Munchhausen-types of comments. He tends to operate with no fear whatsoever for any possible critiques of his wild claims or any negative repercussions that may result.
I tend to ignore him since paying any attention to his statements would require that I start another blog site just for his crackpot comments.
While attending fundraiser in my area a couple of days ago, the VP mentioned the Bin Laden raid (Which, for the record, I think was extremely well-handled from top to bottom). He is quoted as stating the following:
"You can go back 500 years. You cannot find a more audacious plan. Never knowing for certain. We never had more than a 48% probability that he was there."
This is not only another yet another example of why Biden is a terribly sorry joke of a VP, but I think that there is a greater problem that this gaff illustrates. Our educational system, having systematically removed any real history from our kid's classes and textbooks, has created a huge body of people who are functionally unaware of any of our nation's history or that of Western Civilization. In the place of people and events that shaped our society and nation are mini-summaries of this or that person's life experience in whatever nation or region in which he or she lived. These of course can be helpful and interesting, but cannot even come close to being considered sufficient for teaching history. My youngest had a World History Honors class as a HS Freshman last year. His class did not cover a single paragraph of Greek, Roman, Jewish, Christian, or pre-French revolution Western European history.
I know that it is a push to even consider that the crude and vulgar* VP is capable of thinking that far ahead, but I have to think that only such a system could have created a climate of ignorance in which anyone would feel safe making such a ridiculous remark.
Mr. Biden could have considered the Inchon Landing, Cortez's burning of his ships (OK he wasn't nice but the Aztecs were at least subsequently prevented from cutting out people's hearts and eating their enemies' flesh), Sherman's march through the South, the multiple WWII campaigns, Nelson's moves at the battle of Trafalgar, Wellington's stand at Waterloo, the farmers of Massachusetts who stood against an occupying army, the stand at the Alamo, the people of Greece and the rest of the Balkans revolting against the Ottomans, Irish Nationalists doing the same against the might of Britain......
OK, even I can recognize when I need to put on the brakes. You get the idea; being willing to make the final decision (Admittedly a fine job) to authorize an operation in a nation (Especially one in which we did not have a military presence or permission to fight) to get a really bad guy that the intelligence said probably was there is nowhere within a thousand miles of audacious let alone the most audacious of plans, moves or decisions for any period of time.
Obama seems to have done everything correctly in regards to that operation. It was a good decision and everyone knew that there would be repercussions even in the event of success. This does not, however, mean that this decision even comes close to being described as audacious or exceptionally gutsy.
*Biden also made headlines a day later with a terribly crude, vulgar comment. At a reception in the White House for Irish prime Minister Enda Kenny, Biden mentioned that the word "lubrication" (The context in which that word was being used at the time was about drinking, St. Patrick's Day, etc) could mean something else:
"Mr Biden joked that in Ireland the word had a very different meaning to the US, where it was not associated with drinking.
To nervous laughter from the assembled journalists, he then introduced Mr Kenny and got on with the rest of the proceedings."