Posted on 04/03/2016 4:14:54 PM PDT by AmericanInTokyo
It’s called the ARt of the Deal. These people Japan and S Korea take us for granted. Let them think twice about the free defense they get.
Trump is playing chess, and people like you are playing tiddly winks.
Best. Post. In. WEEKS. Bravo!
A lot, If Trump wins japan gets better protection either by US upgraded military they pay for or by arming themselves with their massive manufacturing ability.
If the rino gets it, the Democrats win big and you can say Bye Bye to the US protection.
bougen ou
Well, I’m certainly not qualified.
All you have to do is listen to the CONTENT of what Trump says minus the catch phrases....He is a fundamnetally flawed candidate.
I agree, we sign that treaty to “prevent” Japan from having armed forces after WW2. If we are going to cancel it, I believe it takes one year.
And then on top of that, Let Japan and S. Korea have nukes? It maybe the match to light up everything.
If we’re going that far, I want Taiwan to have nukes too, with their new anti-chinese president that’s going to take office in a few months.
Reply. If so, I want to hear it directly.
Good one. And he caught hell for that, too. I remember it. It was a mic check as I recall. Not a speech or an interview where he was talking policy.
“Art of the Unbridled Tongue” is more like it.
I speak only for myself, but American power projection since the end of the Cold War has been much costlier than any perceived benefit to America. Our reward for protecting foreign kings has been thousands of killed, tens of thousands wounded, hundreds of billions borrowed, a burgeoning surveillance state and the continued erosion of our liberties.
American greatness was never from protecting foreign kings. Too many have lost sight of that.
One big happy (nuclear) family in Asia. KaBOOM!! ;-)
But Japan does have a self-defense force consisting of an air force and navy that has some capability. They are not totally without an armed force. Is it only an army they are prohibited from having?
Okay, I listened to it and transcribed the comments in question as best as I was able by starting and stopping and typing. Here it is after skipping other subjects and Sarah Palin remarks at the start of the event.
Donald J. Trump Town Hall In Rothschild, Wisconsin (4-2-16)
One thing we are going to do is the military.
So we are like the policeman of the world.
And that’s fine, that’s fine.
But these are really, really wealthy countries.
They are not really powerful because we protect them.
It is okay that we protect them but they gotta start paying us.
When they start paying us and we do good trade deal this country is already turned around. So it is okay that we protect them.
We are going to charge them to protect them.
The question was asked to me recently on television what about NATO?
I said here is the problem with NATO.
It is obsolete.
It is 68 years old.
It was formed to look over the Soviet Union which does not even exist anymore.
And I know what happens. It gets big and bureaucratic.
I said it is obsolete and we pay too much money.
Now when I made the statement I thought I read it somewhere.
People asked me how would you know a thing like that.
So it turns out it is even worse.
We are paying so much money, disproportionately the United States which is all of you.
We are not talking about small money folks.
We are talking about serious, serious money.
We are not only taking care of Germany, taking care of Japan but many others.
And they are not paying their bills.
And why should they because nobody asks them to pay.
I’m going to say pay up.
I’m going to be as Presidential as I can be and at the same time get the money.
But if you are too presidential you won’t get the money.
We are not only going to get them to pay but to pay us the money they owe us for many years.
We’ve been carrying these countries. Many are rich countries some are not but many have the money to pay.
Look at the Ukraine. I have friends in the Ukraine. But we are always the ones fighting for Ukraine. But the people that are neighbors of Ukraine don’t even get involved.
When I talk about armament and protection of all of these countries which is much of the world they have to pay. I don’t want to be a greedy person but we are losing a fortune.
We take care of South Korea. We have 28,000 soldiers on the line between North and South (the maniac).
And here is what I’ve always said. We are protecting Japan from North Korea.
We get a tiny fraction of what (the money) we should be getting.
But we’re protecting Japan.
So I would say to Japan you gotta help us out. We want to help you.
I would rather have them no armed but I’m not going to continue to lose a tremendous amount of money.
And frankly the case could be made let them protect themselves against North Korea.
They would probably wipe em out pretty quick. And if they fight it will be a terrible thing. Terrible. If they fight that would be terrible right? But if they do they do.
But we can’t be the policeman of the world and have $19 trillion in debt going up to $21 trillion. We are sitting on a bubble and it is going to explode. We are all going to end up you know where. We can’t do it.
Now there will be a point with some of these countries where we are going to walk.
And we won’t be gone for long.
Because they are going to call and say come back.
I would much rather protect Japan because I don’t like them armed.
But more likely they will pay and we will not be losing the billions and billions and billions of dollars that we are losing.
And on NATO, after I make my statement a guy that has been studying NATO for 30 years says he is right, it is obsolete and we do pay too much.
It is the same with the United Nations. We pay.
So here is the story. We need to rebuild our roads and bridges. Because you know our bridges are falling down.
We are going to save so much money on waste, fraud and abuse
Event wrap up comments, go vote. You will be proud. Music. Autographs.
“Can you please provide a cogent explanation why US taxpayers must carry the tax burden into perpetuity on money borrowed from China and Japan to protect Japan from China?”
Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, signed after WW2.
“Under the treaty, both parties assumed an obligation to maintain and develop their capacities to resist armed attack in common and to assist each other in case of armed attack on territories under Japanese administration. It was understood, however, that Japan could not come to the defense of the United States because it was constitutionally forbidden to send armed forces overseas (Article 9). In particular, the constitution forbids the maintenance of “land, sea, and air forces.” It also expresses the Japanese people’s renunciation of “the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes”.”
This question has what to do with what? Do you even know why you asked it? I doubt it.
DIIIIIIIIIIIIIIsqualified.
From WHAAAAAAAAAAT?
Thanks. And very impressive.
What about the “good luck” part quoted in this article?
their constitution forbids the maintenance of “land, sea, and air forces.”
They do have a self-defense force. And in July 2014, they tried to amend the constitution allowing them to defend other allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_of_the_Japanese_Constitution
He is trying to get out allies to step up to the plate. It is all in the art of the deal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.