Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I did my best to understand Donald Trump's foreign policy. Here's what I came up with.
Vox ^ | 3/28 | Max Fisher

Posted on 03/29/2016 9:23:28 AM PDT by TangledUpInBlue

Trump's foreign policy often gets discussed as isolationist for its skepticism of allies and foreign entanglements, or as realist for its obsession with self-interest and with cold cost-benefit. In either case, the theory is meant to explain why Trump so disdains virtually every facet of America's international role, from its alliance networks to its foreign military bases and security guarantees.

But the more you hear from Trump, the clearer it becomes that something else is going on: He either does not believe in or simply does not understand the international order that has governed the world since the end of World War II.

This comes through in Trump's declaration that postwar alliance systems such as NATO are "obsolete."

(Excerpt) Read more at vox.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: 2016election; dailykos; demagogicparty; election2016; markosmoulitsas; maxfisher; memebuilding; newyork; nucleartriad; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; tangledupinblue; trump; vox
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last
To: TangledUpInBlue
Donald Trumps foreign policy explained in under 25 minutes.
21 posted on 03/29/2016 9:47:28 AM PDT by Delta 21 (Patiently waiting for the jack booted kick at my door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: austingirl

Trump’s a narcissist? The bar for narcissism has been lowered. Why is that?


22 posted on 03/29/2016 9:48:49 AM PDT by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TangledUpInBlue
Vox? What crap!

Trump for President.

23 posted on 03/29/2016 9:50:53 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TangledUpInBlue

“He either does not believe in or simply does not understand the international order that has governed the world since the end of World War II.”

Of course not. It’s been clear since the “nuclear triad” incident that Trump not only has no clue about foreign policy/strategic matters, but he hasn’t even bothered to hire any advisors to coach him on those subjects.


24 posted on 03/29/2016 9:51:53 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TangledUpInBlue

I’m a Trump supporter but I have issues with much that he says on foreign policy.

I do think we need to rethink almost EVERYTHING. Maybe end up not changing anything, but let’s evaluate ideas that in some cases haven’t changed much in 50 years - NATO, UN, Russia, China, etc.. We have policies/allies/treaties from when the USSR existed. Maybe they still make sense. But we should evaluate to make sure. We haven’t been doing so well with ISIS, the NK nut, Libya, Syria, and other real threats (and Obama added Iran to the list). We may need better coordination with Russia and China than France and Canada to stop the biggest threats. Maybe not. But we can’t say “NATO’s been around 50 years so we can’t change things”. We can still be allies with Europe against Russia but also allies with Russia against ISIS. And if Pakistan is just using nukes to make us do things we shouldn’t we may need to start a new round of talks with them.

We just assume that we need to have the same old supplier create the next generation of fighters even though the current generation doesn’t work so well. Maybe we should talk to Musk (who I hate) instead of let Lockeed or Boeing tell us what we need next. What do our generals expect to need fighters for over the next few decades? Is it the same as they thought in the 1980s? Do they need to be manned (which is much more expensive and takes much longer to design/build)

Kasich and Cruz have “been in the briefings” so they know how to keep doing what we’ve been doing, but better. Doesn’t make me feel good or safe.


25 posted on 03/29/2016 9:52:15 AM PDT by LostPassword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: equaviator

Trump talks about himself in the third person- illeism is the hallmark of the egocentric. He puts his name on everything he builds. He has cheated on his wives and is much married and divorced, paying millions to ensure the women’s silence. You don’t think that’s narcissistic? Low bar? LOL!


26 posted on 03/29/2016 9:53:24 AM PDT by austingirl (Taqiyya, sharia, jihad, and hijera- what else do you need to know about islam?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: austingirl

Well dont hold back, tell us with the sensible foreign of the holy genius Cruz has?

How many more conflicts will we be in to make the world safe for democracy?


27 posted on 03/29/2016 9:55:05 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: austingirl
Explain why this country should continue funding the lion share of Europe's defense? Especially when they are giving away their homelands to the Muslims. Most of them have inadequate fighting forces with very limited resources. Turkey already is a worthless ally.

NATO has really been searching for a reason to exist since the end of the Cold War.

28 posted on 03/29/2016 9:55:28 AM PDT by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lower Deck
How much does the U.S. pay NATO? Well, nobody talks about it now, but here's something from a few years ago: ====================== Gates criticizes NATO; How much does U.S. pay? (from 2011) CBS news ^ | June 10, 2011, 2:02 PM | David Morgan Posted on ‎3‎/‎23‎/‎2016‎ ‎7‎:‎01‎:‎58‎ ‎PM by RC one In a speech in Brussels, outgoing U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that America's military alliance with Europe faces a "dim, if not dismal" future, owing to what he characterized as the United States' disproportionate funding of NATO operations, and of allies "willing and eager for American taxpayers to assume the growing security burden left by reductions in European defense budgets." In decrying the inability of all NATO members to contribute to operations, such as enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya, Gates said, "Frankly, many of those allies sitting on the sidelines do so not because they do not want to participate, but simply because they can't. The military capabilities simply aren't there." The United States contributes between one-fifth and one-quarter of NATO's budget. In FY2010 that contribution totaled $711.8 million. But that factors in only direct payments, not deployments of personnel which - outside of special operations, such as in Afghanistan or Libya - may be used to train European forces (for example, in anti-terrorism skills) that benefit U.S. security. In February NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that over the past two years, "defense spending by NATO's European member nations has shrunk by some 45 billion dollars" - the equivalent of Germany's entire annual defense budget. Gates' argument that by slashing their defense budgets European countries are allowing the U.S. to pick up the slack comes when the United States is already spending more on defense than all other nations on the planet combined, according to Boston University professor Andrew Bacevich. ====================== Of course, we pay much more. At least until Obama destroyed much of our military, we contributed huge numbers of ships, tanks, troops, planes, etc. We have troops defending Europe. Do they send troops over here to defend us? And there's all the other countries we fund, including huge amounts to place like Turkey and Iran. Not to mention India and "Pockistan." And China.
29 posted on 03/29/2016 9:55:39 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Ditto that.


30 posted on 03/29/2016 9:55:42 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TangledUpInBlue

He either does not believe in or simply does not understand the international ORDER that GOVERNS...

Go Trump GO!


31 posted on 03/29/2016 9:55:46 AM PDT by Harpotoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: equaviator

When you say you don’t need foreign policy advisors because you can just “consult yourself” because you’re so smart, well, you have admitted your own narcissism.


32 posted on 03/29/2016 9:56:11 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TangledUpInBlue

Vox, your “best” kinda sucks.


33 posted on 03/29/2016 9:56:54 AM PDT by VitacoreVision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TangledUpInBlue
Are we talking about the nuclear triad ("Daddy, what is that?") clown?

Reagan spent decades deep thinking the issues. That is why he was so very successful when he because POTUS. This clown is so shallow and out of his depth.

34 posted on 03/29/2016 9:59:51 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: austingirl

“He puts his name on everything he builds”

Why not?


35 posted on 03/29/2016 10:00:27 AM PDT by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

“Narcissism” is a term that is more loosely used than ever.


36 posted on 03/29/2016 10:02:22 AM PDT by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Not surprising that the TDS sufferers so often use HuffPo, Vox, and WashPo as sources.

37 posted on 03/29/2016 10:03:03 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Here's to the day the forensics people scrape what's left of Putin off the ceiling of his limo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: austingirl; xzins; dforest; hoosiermama; DoughtyOne; onyx; MinuteGal; M. Thatcher; grania; ...

It’s called “setting the agenda”, curly.

TRUMP with brains, and single handedly, simply romps the field in DC and on the campaign trail. He has set the agenda in both parties.

It’s called Leadership. He’s got it. They don’t.

Speaking to what the people believe, in every case, should not require professional handlers, ballot stealing and buying off prissy delegates to return the Establishment to power. They have been rocked by Donald Trump and deserve it.

But, staying in the personal and in the psychological weeds is easier for some— the follow-the-bouncing-ball crowd, the establishment voters who can’t follow the plays but fall for the pony tricks of the already elected who failed.

Wake up.


38 posted on 03/29/2016 10:03:39 AM PDT by RitaOK ( VIVA CRISTO REY / Public education is the farm team for more Marxists coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

So, how stupid is that?

Trump’s answer was not stupid at all.

How do you make a deal that gives your adversary a 100% of what they want and leaves you and your country with absolutely nothing but a Nuke suicide attack in the near future?

And on top of that America has to defend Iran against Israel whether it’s against a cyber or military attack!

Go Trump Go!


39 posted on 03/29/2016 10:04:04 AM PDT by Harpotoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LostPassword

I’m glad I can find a Trump supporter who is honest about Trump’s lack of knowledge in foreign policy. I will say I agree with you that we should re-think our foreign policy. I believe we should always be re-thinking our global strategies and I welcome outside the box thinking. I agreed with Obama on our re-focus from Europe to Asia “pivot” and we were in the process of doing that until this whole Ukraine mess.

Someone in a previous post stated why should we care about defending the Baltic states. Well, one main reason is that they are NATO members and an attack on one member is an attack on all members and we are bound by NATO treaty to defend them. People may say NATO is outdated and unneeded, however I believe it has kept another European war from happening so it is indeed very important. Think that can’t happen now? What about the Ukraine.

I agree we should be pressuring our NATO partners to live up to the rules of the alliance. That is every member state is supposed to be spending at least 3% of their GDP on defense. We and I think one or two others are the only ones that do. If Trump were to say something like that, I could agree with him, but I doubt he even knows about that.

One thing he doesn’t get is the same thing that Obama doesn’t get. Power abhors a vacuum. If we abandon our allies, they will find other strategic partners to align with and we may not like the outcome. Witness what our feckless leader’s lack of engagement in the current mess in the middle east has created. Russia would have never gotten involved there had we taken a strong stand in 2012. You know, the line in the sand stuff. If we would not have left Iraq high and dry, there would be no ISIS in Iraq right now.

He has shown that he is a neophyte in regards to foreign policy. As the article points out, he doesn’t understand the benefits that we derive from our National security strategy. Can it be done better? Heck yeah! Now lets hear ideas on that Mr. Trump.


40 posted on 03/29/2016 10:09:39 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson