Posted on 07/24/2016 7:17:01 AM PDT by Kaslin
If there has been any constant in the Republican worldview over decades, it's that American strength, resolve and credibility are essential in foreign affairs, and weakness and uncertainty lead straight to disaster. The GOP legions regard Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as failures because they have been insufficiently willing to challenge our adversaries and stand with our friends.
"Our allies don't trust us, and our enemies don't fear us" is a claim made by one Republican after another. But the Cleveland convention was a study in dissonance between the bedrock convictions of just about every loyal Republican and the opinions of the presidential nominee.
People who denounce Obama for "leading from behind," appeasing Vladimir Putin, failing to go to war against Bashar Assad and criticizing America lined up in support of Donald Trump -- whose policies are subject to exactly the same criticisms. There is much to fault in the GOP's past approach, but Republicans are in a strange position: They unquestionably affirm their long-standing policies without seeming to realize their candidate doesn't.
Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn proclaimed to the delegates, "There is no substitute for American leadership and exceptionalism." Trump, however, affects nonchalance on such matters.
Exceptionalism? "I don't know that we have a right to lecture (other countries)," Trump said in an interview with The New York Times. "How are we going to lecture when people are shooting our policemen in cold blood?" Imagine what Chris Christie would say if those words had come out of Obama's mouth.
How about leadership? Trump indicated it's no sure thing that we'd honor our treaty obligation to defend any NATO member attacked by, say, Russia. "If we cannot be properly reimbursed for the tremendous cost of our military protecting other countries," he said, "I would be absolutely prepared to tell those countries, 'Congratulations, you will be defending yourself.'"
Hmm. It's almost as though under President Trump our allies wouldn't be able to trust us. Asked about the value of our presence in South Korea, which has coincided with 60 years of peace, he scoffed. Without it, he speculated, "maybe you would have had a unified Korea."
Japan? "Well, what are we getting out of this?" All of these allies, he suggested, should never be completely sure of our commitments. "In a deal, you always have to be prepared to walk," he explained.
Compare Trump's comments about NATO with Ronald Reagan's in 1988: "We often say that if the bomb is dropped in Amsterdam, it is the equivalent of dropping a bomb on Chicago." Reagan would have said the same about Seoul and Tokyo. Trump apparently thinks a bomb dropped on Amsterdam is a bomb dropped on Amsterdam, nothing more.
What about making sure our enemies fear us? Christie excoriated Clinton for once expressing hope that Assad would be better than his father, who preceded him as ruler of Syria. Trump, however, is not itching to go after the regime. "I think that ISIS is a threat that's much more important for us right now than Assad," he said.
Russia? "I think Putin and I will get along very well," he said. "It would be wonderful if we had good relationships with Russia so that we don't have to go through all of the drama."
Republicans have denounced Obama for denying lethal defensive military aid to Ukraine after its invasion by Russia. But Trump blocked an endorsement of such help in the platform -- which pledges only "appropriate assistance." Do the delegates think that will make the Kremlin quake in fear?
The GOP standard-bearer manages to distract attention from these violations of Republican security orthodoxy with his ostentatiously macho talk -- about bombing the Islamic State and vowing that Iran will "never, ever be allowed to have" nuclear weapons. But behind the rhetoric are ignorance and confusion.
Never has the GOP nominated someone whose intentions are so unpredictable. The conservative principles for ensuring our security and spreading our values have been turned over to someone who doesn't seem to understand them, much less champion them. In effect, he has emasculated the party's foreign policy.
In his acceptance speech, Trump drew lusty cheers as he blamed Clinton for all the trouble in the world. The stark irony is that if anyone in the race is likely to uphold the traditional Republican strategy, it's Clinton.
The delegates, like our enemies and allies, have no real idea how President Trump would operate in a perilous world. The difference is that our enemies and allies actually give a damn.
This only proves that there is no free press in the US.
you ain’t kidding...this is like tabloid reactionary material...where’s the critical thinking?
This article and other similiar articles are reached by going to townhall.com..
Some hand in building is necessary to those who would wage war on the scale of the US. Vacuums get filled with what we don’t want, if we don’t set them up to be filled with what we do want. What is built, however, is important. The typical Muslim society needs a democracy like a fish needs a bicycle. It would not know what to do with it.
Emasculation?
It’s RE-masculation and DE-hillarization.
I’ve noticed of late that Hotair/townhall have been very anti-Trump! I’m tired of their hit pieces against him...as of today I will no longer visit their sites and will remove them from my bookmarks!
Thanks for the link.
Most of these supposedly conservative sites and talk show hosts are like the dinosaurs after the meteor strike, thanks to Trump!
So will NR. Because look at where standing athwart history has gotten us. We are living in the dystopia the Founders feared.
Townhall has really went down the tubes.
I hope all these "Conservative Piranhas" eat each other trying to keep their ill-deserved gigs!
What foreign policy?
Look at the shambles republicans and democrats have made of the world since July 1990.
In July 1990, under president H.W. Bush, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, met with Saddam Hussein and discussed the impending Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
Ambassador Glaspie told Saddam that “the Kuwait issue is not associated with America”, essentially giving him the US okay to invade.
In August, 1990 Saddam invaded Kuwait.
In January 1991 the US led forces invaded Kuwait and forced Iraq1 forces out in what is known as the firdt Gulf War.
That action led to the ongoing military containment of Iraq, the 9/11 attack on the USA, the second Gulf War, the fall of Iraq, the rise of Iranian power in the mideast, the fall of Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc., etc., etc.
Read miore about April Glaspie’s actions here:
Couple of observations:
* Townhall is a satellite of National Review which, after Bill Buckley, has morphed into a gaggle of R establishment schmucks and assorted Nancy Boys like Lowery and this jurno clown.
* Lord Palmerston, British PM, said it best in a minimum of words: “Great Nations have neither allies nor friends; they simply have interests.”
Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya all had secular governments... oppressive dictatorships ..but not religious extremists.
The US, under both R and D acted to nation build by deposing the secular governments ... to be replaced by religious extremists.
Secular Russia jumped in to help secular Syria.
Secular Egypt regained control from the Brotherhood.
In the others secular governments were replaced by something worse.
Why is it the US (both parties) targets secular governments to overthrow and do nation-building?
Huge meltdown among Dems with the WikiLeaks story, and Town Hall posts hit pieces on Trump?
We need to purge the Republican party after Trump wins.
Trump called rebuilding our military to be so strong we never have to use it. The statement is entirely consistent with the above. Who wants to go through the drama of the cold war ever again? It was expensive.
And, it is our neocons who have got us in trouble with Russia. When the soviet union collapsed, it was still a nuclear superpower - lest anyone forget - capable of reducing us to cinders. But our neocons insisted on poking the bear while he was wounded. How's that working out for us now? Our neocons keep thinking we can walk right up to the Russian border and they can say nothing.
And, our neocons thought we could swindle the Russians out of their Black Sea ports by cozying up to the Ukraine. Suppose we saw the Chinese making whopee with native Hawaiians in a move to get us out of Pearl Harbor.
Look at it from the Russian perspective. How about if we saw Chinese carriers docking in Pierre and Miquelon Islands? And we don't have a millenium of Russian paranoia about foreign invaders - though we are beginning to learn.
Our neocons have to be about the dumbest folks in the world. They wanted to play the Great Game and move the pieces around the chess board. But it's not a game for silly children.
Don't get out much, huh?
Townhall is a leading "invade the world, invite the world" pusher.
Hey fool, why do you keep posting these anti trump articles?
A strong demurral:
* Bush 1 was correct while Bush 2 was a foreign policy moron. If the latter had a solitary brain he might have grasped that Saddam Hussein was the mortal enemy of the Mullahs of Iran, our greater enemy. Hence Saddam was our “friend” who we should have left alone. By removing him, we gave Iran a free hand to set the Mid-East on fire and the West is now paying for it.
* At its core, the Great War was an extension of the ancient and enduring enmity between the Gauls and the Saxons, continually referenced by Julius Caesar in his War Dispatches to Rome. It was never any of our business. Wilson, like Bush; another pious moron who wore his sanctimonious humanitarianism on his sleeve insisted we make the world safe for Democracy. Predictably, the Europeans laughed him out of their continent.
The wise Lord Palmerston correctly asserted that “Great Nations have neither allies nor friends; they simply have interests.”
America's foreign policy is about defending AMERICAN interests abroad. If that means disengaging from the corrupt and counter-productive UN, so be it. If that means imposing expectations on our "allies," so be it. If that means alienating our tepid sunshine supporters, so be it. If we're going to expend American lives and treasure on behalf of a culture halfway around the world, then we have the right to expect some return on that investment.
None of that is counter to the prevailing conservative canon. Nor is it an endorsement of the craven policies of this current quisling administration, whose only foreign policy seems to be lies sandwiched with cowardice.
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.