Trump of the Will: The Donald's foreign policy and his team, it's the best team

[Berkut]

Doesn't "questioning NATO' and "embracing non-interventionism" sound like exactly what Europeans want us to do?

Or is that just the ranting teenagers on EUOT?

As I've been saying for some time...be careful what you wish for, you just might get it...

America has a pretty strong, but generally latent, isolationist streak. That was obviously rather decisively put to sleep by WW2 and the aftermath.

But I think some 80 years later, that streak is getting pretty strong. Trump is an ignorant idiot obviously when it comes to foreign policy, but he understands the basic American psyche, it seems. And Americans are pretty tired of protecting the world it seems, and getting shit on as thanks.

[viper37]

And Americans are pretty tired of protecting the world it seems, and getting shit on as thanks.

You did get a lot of commercial opportunities from protecting Europe against the Soviets.
Same as you do now from protecting South Korea, and other countries, against North Korea.

As for getting shit on as thanks, deal with it.  It will happen either way.  You do nothing, you are barbarians for not doing anything, it's only because the victims are muslims/black/brown/not english speaking/not in america/etc you don't do anything.  You didn't do much in the Syrian civil war, and it's coming to bite you.  The Euros are in the same situation, they avoided for as long as they could intervening against a barbaric regime, but that did not prevent attacks against them or their citizens abroad.

As for isolationism, we could discuss at lenght what that really meant in your history.  It's closer to unilateralism or no-interventionism than true isolationism.  The US sure has been at war with a lots of nations since it's founding to be a true isolationist power. 

[Valmy]

As for isolationism, we could discuss at lenght what that really meant in your history.  It's closer to unilateralism or no-interventionism than true isolationism.  The US sure has been at war with a lots of nations since it's founding to be a true isolationist power. 

The only true isolationist power was Japan and I am not sure we can just outlaw foreigners as effectively.

[Razgovory]

You did get a lot of commercial opportunities from protecting Europe against the Soviets.
Same as you do now from protecting South Korea, and other countries, against North Korea.

This is what is forgotten by people like Trump (or more likely they never knew it), the current international system was set up by the US so that we could profit from it.  The fact that the rest of the world profits is not a bad thing.  It's not a zero/sum game.  The US maintains a large number of military bases so the US can strike in areas of instability worldwide.  Instability is bad for business.  That the Japanese also profit from this stability is a positive.  It keeps them busy and content and not bombing pearl harbor.

[Ed Anger]

As for isolationism, we could discuss at lenght what that really meant in your history.  It's closer to unilateralism or no-interventionism than true isolationism.  The US sure has been at war with a lots of nations since it's founding to be a true isolationist power. 

The only true isolationist power was Japan and I am not sure we can just outlaw foreigners as effectively.

If only. 

[Berkut]

And Americans are pretty tired of protecting the world it seems, and getting shit on as thanks.

You did get a lot of commercial opportunities from protecting Europe against the Soviets.
Same as you do now from protecting South Korea, and other countries, against North Korea.

As for getting shit on as thanks, deal with it.  It will happen either way.  You do nothing, you are barbarians for not doing anything, it's only because the victims are muslims/black/brown/not english speaking/not in america/etc you don't do anything.  You didn't do much in the Syrian civil war, and it's coming to bite you.  The Euros are in the same situation, they avoided for as long as they could intervening against a barbaric regime, but that did not prevent attacks against them or their citizens abroad.

As for isolationism, we could discuss at lenght what that really meant in your history.  It's closer to unilateralism or no-interventionism than true isolationism.  The US sure has been at war with a lots of nations since it's founding to be a true isolationist power. 

That is an impressive stringing together of strawman arguments. Well done.

[Monoriu]

He also said he would be open to allowing Japan and South Korea to build their own nuclear arsenals rather than depend on the American nuclear umbrella for their protection against North Korea and China. If the United States "keeps on its path, its current path of weakness, they're going to want to have that anyway, with or without me discussing it," Mr. Trump said.

I don't understand his idea here.  Isn't US policy to limit the spread of nuclear weapons to as few countries as possible?  Also, Trump probably isn't aware that Japan is fiercely against nuclear weapons.  A lot of Japanese think nuclear weapons is the ultimate evil.  Japan has the technical knowhow and economic base to build nuclear weapons for many decades, but they have refrained from doing so for a reason.  I also don't think arming South Korea with nuclear weapons will mesh well with the US stance that North Korea should be a nuclear weapons free area.  If South Korea is nuclear armed, then the North will have solid grounds to be so armed as well. 

[Norgy]

I don't think Trump really cares about actual reality. He seems to be enjoying his own version too much.
It's GRAYEET

[The Brain]

Make America Geat Again! #beowulf

[Norgy]

Make America Grate Again! #nomorepregratedcheese

[CountDeMoney]

Make America Grrrrrrreat Again
#FrostedFlakes

[viper37]

And Americans are pretty tired of protecting the world it seems, and getting shit on as thanks.

You did get a lot of commercial opportunities from protecting Europe against the Soviets.
Same as you do now from protecting South Korea, and other countries, against North Korea.

As for getting shit on as thanks, deal with it.  It will happen either way.  You do nothing, you are barbarians for not doing anything, it's only because the victims are muslims/black/brown/not english speaking/not in america/etc you don't do anything.  You didn't do much in the Syrian civil war, and it's coming to bite you.  The Euros are in the same situation, they avoided for as long as they could intervening against a barbaric regime, but that did not prevent attacks against them or their citizens abroad.

As for isolationism, we could discuss at lenght what that really meant in your history.  It's closer to unilateralism or no-interventionism than true isolationism.  The US sure has been at war with a lots of nations since it's founding to be a true isolationist power. 

That is an impressive stringing together of strawman arguments. Well done.

Then keep listening to Trump, if he hasn't done so already, he'll soon convince you he'll make America great again

[viper37]

He also said he would be open to allowing Japan and South Korea to build their own nuclear arsenals rather than depend on the American nuclear umbrella for their protection against North Korea and China. If the United States "keeps on its path, its current path of weakness, they're going to want to have that anyway, with or without me discussing it," Mr. Trump said.

I don't understand his idea here.  Isn't US policy to limit the spread of nuclear weapons to as few countries as possible?  Also, Trump probably isn't aware that Japan is fiercely against nuclear weapons.  A lot of Japanese think nuclear weapons is the ultimate evil.  Japan has the technical knowhow and economic base to build nuclear weapons for many decades, but they have refrained from doing so for a reason.  I also don't think arming South Korea with nuclear weapons will mesh well with the US stance that North Korea should be a nuclear weapons free area.  If South Korea is nuclear armed, then the North will have solid grounds to be so armed as well. 

More weapons make us safer.  Handguns, rifles, assault weapons, machine guns and now nuclear weapons for everyone is just the logical extension.
Except for Republican party convention that are to be no-weapon zones.

[Norgy]

Make America Wait Again! #jdsalinger

[Monoriu]

He also said he would be open to allowing Japan and South Korea to build their own nuclear arsenals rather than depend on the American nuclear umbrella for their protection against North Korea and China. If the United States "keeps on its path, its current path of weakness, they're going to want to have that anyway, with or without me discussing it," Mr. Trump said.

I don't understand his idea here.  Isn't US policy to limit the spread of nuclear weapons to as few countries as possible?  Also, Trump probably isn't aware that Japan is fiercely against nuclear weapons.  A lot of Japanese think nuclear weapons is the ultimate evil.  Japan has the technical knowhow and economic base to build nuclear weapons for many decades, but they have refrained from doing so for a reason.  I also don't think arming South Korea with nuclear weapons will mesh well with the US stance that North Korea should be a nuclear weapons free area.  If South Korea is nuclear armed, then the North will have solid grounds to be so armed as well. 

More weapons make us safer.  Handguns, rifles, assault weapons, machine guns and now nuclear weapons for everyone is just the logical extension.
Except for Republican party convention that are to be no-weapon zones.

I think Trump is *already* undermining US foreign policy now.  He is the Republican front-runner, someone with a real shot at becoming the next US president.  His words carry weight.  No need to wait for the election; people are already wondering what is going on with the US and the Republican party.