Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Danzy wrote: »

It boils down to Europe's security being Europe's problem

Lucky for the US Europe didn't think the same way when they needed help after 9/11, eh?

But what actually did NATO force the US to do? They are always going to spend vast amounts on money on the military, and by being in NATO they were able to deploy in places like Germany without much actual cost.

It also meant that the US were protected from far from their shores, able to respond quickly to foreign threats. The mere existence of NATO provided a wall against Russia.

So I fail to see how this improves anything for America. Trump is supposed to be MAGA, I fail to see how this achieves it.

Danzy

Leroy42 wrote: »

So the US are going to retreat from the EU, giving a free hand to the likes of Russia and China?

Really? So in two short years, with no discussion or debate, Trump has decided to tear with the backbone of US global power over the last number of decades, without any giving any idea of why he thinks its a bad idea or what he is going to replace it with.

He has recently agreed to pull out of the Korean Peninsula. He is threatening to pull out of Europe. Do Americans really feel that NATO has been of no benefit to them, such that they should leave it?

The Russian economy is little bigger than that of the Netherlands and Belgium, it is dwarfed in terms of wealth and population by those to its West.

The big boy across the Pond is not going to give a free hand anymore, this was going to happen eventually whoever was President, the cheques were going to stop eventually. No one is stopping Germany from improving its army, which is not fit for purpose.

Global security Issues are in the future largely going to be ranging from North Africa to the China Sea.

Is it of benefit now, is the question.

Hard not to see it as a relic of a bygone era.

weisses

Danzy wrote: »

That doesn't affect my point.

It kinda does .... 600 billion for defense of the US alone ???

Danzy wrote: »

It boils down to Europe's security being Europe's problem.

It is a large and rich continent.

Yes and ?? ... Article 5 was only invoked once .... And it wasn't Europe who did it .... doesn't that boils down to USA security being the USA's problem ?

Danzy wrote: »

It is a valid perspective for an American President to take and it was inevitable.

It is a selfish, shortsighted, idiotic, childish, perspective ...... fits the current POTUS

Danzy wrote: »

Global focus is moving South and to the East.

Specifically ?

everlast75 wrote: »

Can someone else deal with this? I'm frankly not bothered

Best way to deal with it is for nobody to be bothered at this point.

Danzy wrote: »

Is it of benefit now, is the question.

Hard not to see it as a relic of a bygone era.

Exaclty the question I was asking. So you don't see any value in NATO?

OK, that's fine, but why then is Trump jumping about with his bashing of Germany and his demand for extra spending. There is no threat, Russia is of little consequence, why does he care?

Why not simply state you are leaving because A,B and C, we of course remain close friends and allies but in a different relationship in terms of military cooperation blah blah.

The only conclusion that one can take from Trump is that he does see the value, he does see the importance, but he wants others to help out more. But then this makes his threat to leave as either totally pointless or dangerous for US.

weisses wrote: »

It is one thing to embarrass the people you meet, Quite a different thing when it involves your own team

According to the WH Kelly was displeased because he didn't got a full breakfast ... Nothing to do with Trumps Childish behaviour :rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbKlm2OQwxw

He doesn't want to fire Kelly ... Maybe he is hoping the poor fella will resign

There is no poor fella there.

listermint

Danzy wrote: »

2008 marked the failing of Neoliberalism, the status quo of the Reagan/Thatcher era up to then, was over.

His scrapping of TPP was straight from the Bernie Sanders playbook, his clamping down on illegal migration is economically more on the Left, than any Free market Republican.

He is no Jeremy Corbyn but he is tearing up Status quo and given the changes of the last 40 years, someone was going to come along and do that.

Trump doesn't believe in Pax Americana, the States as global policeman, this is just another sign of that.

As I said, he is no Corbyn but he marks the move away from Reaganism.

The idea that trump as any agenda other than what is in front of him at any moment in time is hilarious.

he is the equivalent of a political goldfish, he deals with what is in front of him his advisors give him some pointers and he just goes with the first thing that comes into his head. Then forgets about it.

He is a rich child. nothing more and not some social warrior, liberal, far right or conservative.

RIGOLO

Leroy42 wrote: »

The only conclusion that one can take from Trump is that he does see the value, he does see the importance, but he wants others to help out more. But then this makes his threat to leave as either totally pointless or dangerous for US.

Yes thats pretty much what he has been saying for about 12 months if not longer.
Good to see the penny has dropped. It really was a fairly simple point, I am surprised it took this long for people to work it out, but Im glad you have .

Leroy42 wrote: »

"Do there own thing". What like invade Iraq without any international backing?

So Trump pulls out of NATO, then what. They lose access to all the European basis straight away. They lose access to European waters for their naval fleet. They lose access to Europe military assets.

What exactly is Trump trying to achieve with this? He hasn't given any details of what he thinks are the benefits currently, or the benefits from getting increases from the rest. Just, spend more money. That is the policy it would seem.

It's simple enough to me actually, appeasement has been shown to not work very well when dealing with a bully on the international stage and standing up to them early is more preferable to late

He wants to pull the US out of NATO? Fine call his bluff. Make him understand he does not have all the power in the relationship, that he needs Europe to be friendly to the US.

I have mentioned before how I firmly believe there are times to be idealistic and times when you must be realistic and deal with things the way they are rather than the way you hope or want them to be.

jobbridge4life

StringerBell wrote: »

It's simple enough to me actually, appeasement has been shown to not work very well when dealing with a bully on the international stage and standing up to them early is more preferable to late

He wants to pull the US out of NATO? Fine call his bluff. Make him understand he does not have all the power in the relationship, that he needs Europe to be friendly to the US.

I have mentioned before how I firmly believe there are times to be idealistic and times when you must be realistic and deal with things the way they are rather than the way you hope or want them to be.

Unfortunately at the moment however Europe does need the US, the threat to eastern EU members from Russia is extremely real. This makes Trump's remarks around Crimea all the more disturbing, many of the eastern member states have sizable Russian speaking minorities.

I agree with your point about realism, I think that the reality Europe must face is that it can no longer rely on the US. Every effort to establish an effective and fully independent European military defence capability must be made as a matter of urgency.

RIGOLO wrote: »

Yes thats pretty much what he has been saying for about 12 months if not longer.
Good to see the penny has dropped. It really was a fairly simple point, I am surprised it took this long for people to work it out, but Im glad you have .

Ah Rigolo, you didn't deal with the bit I was questioning.

If you agree with him about the importance etc, then surely it is complete folly, nay even dangerous, for the US to even contemplate ditching NATO.

Was that just bluster, in which case why should anyone listen to any of the rest of his bluster?

And he wants others to pay, fair enough, but he will do what by walking out? How is that going to MAGA?

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Unfortunately at the moment however Europe does need the US, the threat to eastern EU members from Russia is extremely real. This makes Trump's remarks around Crimea all the more disturbing, many of the eastern member states have sizable Russian speaking minorities.

I agree with your point about realism, I think that the reality Europe must face is that it can no longer rely on the US. Every effort to establish an effective and fully independent European military defence capability must be made as a matter of urgency.

Europe needs the US and the US needs Europe. It for sure needs the Goodwill of Europe and that has a value.

An alliance is not a one way street and if Trump wants to treat it as his usual zero sum game strategy that is what he will do. Europe should face him down or do their own thing. A person who bullies you is not your friend.

StringerBell wrote: »

It's simple enough to me actually, appeasement has been shown to not work very well when dealing with a bully on the international stage and standing up to them early is more preferable to late

He wants to pull the US out of NATO? Fine call his bluff. Make him understand he does not have all the power in the relationship, that he needs Europe to be friendly to the US.

I have mentioned before how I firmly believe there are times to be idealistic and times when you must be realistic and deal with things the way they are rather than the way you hope or want them to be.

Germany should pull out of Afghanistan

everlast75 wrote: »

Germany should pull out of Afghanistan

I get where you are coming from, but the people who suffer most from that are the afghans not the Trump administration or the US military, they would be able to plough more money into their budget actually citing how it is necessary after their supposed friend left them in the lurch while trying to deliver freedom to the world.

Leaving before the job is done (will it ever be done?) Is not the right answer there. Of course not intervening in soverign nation's and causing absolute chaos in the first place is the ideal solution there!

jobbridge4life

StringerBell wrote: »

Europe needs the US and the US needs Europe. It for sure needs the Goodwill of Europe and that has a value.

An alliance is not a one way street and if Trump wants to treat it as his usual zero sum game strategy that is what he will do. Europe should face him down or do their own thing. A person who bullies you is not your friend.

I agree but we cannot control Trump's whims and engaging in a tit for tat with a man with no understanding/respect for the alliance and even less scruples is not a winning strategy.

The best course of action as I see it is to let him rant away, increase military spending and focus on building internal military capacity. It was a mistake to allow European defence become so dependent on an external power, even if until recently they have been a reliable partner.

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

Can someone else deal with this? I'm frankly not bothered

StringerBell wrote: »

Best way to deal with it is for nobody to be bothered at this point.

##Mod Note##

Not helpful..

StringerBell wrote: »

I get where you are coming from, but the people who suffer from that are the afghans not the Trump administration or the US military, they would be able to plough more money into their budget actually citing how it is necessary after their supposed friend left them in the lurch while trying to deliver freedom to the world.

Let Trump try rationalise it if he pulls out of NATO first

everlast75 wrote: »

Let Trump try rationalise it if he pulls out of NATO first

He won't, you know he won't. He will say how bad a deal they had, how unfair it was and how they will come crawling back

Pretty much how he deals with the Iran deal.

You would hope that Congress would put a check on him leaving the alliance but...

RIGOLO

jobbridge4life wrote: »

StringerBell wrote: »

It's simple enough to me actually, appeasement has been shown to not work very well when dealing with a bully on the international stage and standing up to them early is more preferable to late

He wants to pull the US out of NATO? Fine call his bluff. Make him understand he does not have all the power in the relationship, that he needs Europe to be friendly to the US.

I have mentioned before how I firmly believe there are times to be idealistic and times when you must be realistic and deal with things the way they are rather than the way you hope or want them to be.

Unfortunately at the moment however Europe does need the US, the threat to eastern EU members from Russia is extremely real. This makes Trump's remarks around Crimea all the more disturbing, many of the eastern member states have sizable Russian speaking minorities.

I agree with your point about realism, I think that the reality Europe must face is that it can no longer rely on the US. Every effort to establish an effective and fully independent European military defence capability must be made as a matter of urgency.

No longer rely on the US, the US have been ramping up Europena based military prescence under TRump .
You should read the NATO press releases ...
Jens Stoltenberg the NATO Secretary General ... and I quote ...

On top of that, on the initiative of President Trump last May, last year, we agreed to develop the national plans as a very powerful tool, to make sure that Allies deliver on the promise to increase defence spending.
When it comes to US presence in Europe, what we have seen is that the United States has increased their military presence in Europe. After the end of the Cold War, the United States reduced its military presence. The last US battle tank left Europe in 2013. And now, the United States is back with a full armoured brigade. And just since President Trump became President, or took Office, US funding for a US military presence in Europe has been increased by 40%. So, actions speak louder than words. I am absolutely confident about the US commitment to European security and also their military presence.

All the hysteria about US pulling out of NATO is just being feed by sensationalist MSM comments and anti-Trump biased analysis.
He has far from said he would pull the US out, in fact his impromptu press conference in Brussles said many positive tings about NATO and about the US commitment to NATO.
Roll on Buckingham Palace, after the hectic schedule he has had in the last few weeks the man has earned a few days playing golf.

StringerBell wrote: »

He won't, you know he won't. He will say how bad a deal they had, how unfair it was and how they will come crawling back

Pretty much how he deals with the Iran deal.

You would hope that Congress would put a check on him leaving the alliance but...

There are only motives as I see it for him to go bang the drum in NATO matters

1) play to his base on the subject of "making others pay their way", "stopping others laughing at the US" etc etc

2) as a pretence to doing nothing when Putin decides to go on another expansion tour, either by leaving NATO or else saying they will do nothing as NATO didn't pay their way

So to me, its possible he may.

robinph

RIGOLO wrote: »

Roll on Buckingham Palace, after the hectic schedule he has had in the last few weeks the man has earned a few days playing golf.

Unfortunately he's not going anywhere near Buckingham Palace, the protests that would happen there would be immense and unavoidable.

They are sticking to keeping him in remote places in the middle of nowhere. The most accessible place he's going is Windsor, and that will probably just be a helicopter ride into the middle of the grounds and back out again.

Danzy

StringerBell wrote: »

It's simple enough to me actually, appeasement has been shown to not work very well when dealing with a bully on the international stage and standing up to them early is more preferable to late

He wants to pull the US out of NATO? Fine call his bluff. Make him understand he does not have all the power in the relationship, that he needs Europe to be friendly to the US.

I have mentioned before how I firmly believe there are times to be idealistic and times when you must be realistic and deal with things the way they are rather than the way you hope or want them to be.

It is much worse than being bullied, he wants them to buy their round.

They could handle being bullied, the other one causes greater problems.

The Post war consensus is over, like many things it lasted longer than the circumstances that it was created for.

This will never return, even if Trump is replaced by a Democrat in the next election.

The days of Dubya and Daddy, the interventionist politics of Hilary, all belong to a different era, an America that was the sole superpower.

States are going to have to stand more on their own feet.

alchemist33

RIGOLO wrote: »

Roll on Buckingham Palace, after the hectic schedule he has had in the last few weeks the man has earned a few days playing golf.

If he does it would be as good a time as any to remind people of the 27 times he complained on Twitter about Obama golfing https://www.sbnation.com/golf/2017/3/27/15073086/donald-trump-tweets-barack-obama-golf

everlast75 wrote: »

There are only motives as I see it for him to go bang the drum in NATO matters

1) play to his base on the subject of "making others pay their way", "stopping others laughing at the US" etc etc

2) as a pretence to doing nothing when Putin decides to go on another expansion tour, either by leaving NATO or else saying they will do nothing as NATO didn't pay their way

So to me, its possible he may.

Sorry I didn't mean he wouldn't try blow up the alliance, I mean that he wouldn't bother with any justification beyond what I laid out in the other post then he let's his state media and surrogates spread the message far and wide.

RIGOLO

alchemist33 wrote: »

RIGOLO wrote: »

Roll on Buckingham Palace, after the hectic schedule he has had in the last few weeks the man has earned a few days playing golf.

If he does it would be as good a time as any to remind people of the 27 times he complained on Twitter about Obama golfing https://www.sbnation.com/golf/2017/3/27/15073086/donald-trump-tweets-barack-obama-golf

Yeah but the difference is when Obama attended a NATO summit before going to play golf , the US picked up the NATO free bar tab.
This time , Trump has gotten the NATO members to buy some of their own drinks, before he tees off.

Christy42

Danzy wrote: »

StringerBell wrote: »

It's simple enough to me actually, appeasement has been shown to not work very well when dealing with a bully on the international stage and standing up to them early is more preferable to late

He wants to pull the US out of NATO? Fine call his bluff. Make him understand he does not have all the power in the relationship, that he needs Europe to be friendly to the US.

I have mentioned before how I firmly believe there are times to be idealistic and times when you must be realistic and deal with things the way they are rather than the way you hope or want them to be.

It is much worse than being bullied, he wants them to buy their round.

They could handle being bullied, the other one causes greater problems.

The Post war consensus is over, like many things it lasted longer than the circumstances that it was created for.

This will never return, even if Trump is replaced by a Democrat in the next election.

The days of Dubya and Daddy, the interventionist politics of Hilary, all belong to a different era, an America that was the sole superpower.

States are going to have to stand more on their own feet.

He went for tax breaks for the rich and wants a sharp increase in the West's military power. 4% investment in NATO? Does he really plan for all that military power to sit around gathering rust? Do you believe that?

It is kind of amusing that we have two posters arguing Trump is focused on two different contradictory goals. That is his ability, he let's his supporters fill in the gaps and assume he meant whatever they wanted him to mean.

He won't leave NATO in January largely because he will have forgotten this meeting by the time January comes around again. He doesn't care. He just likes shouting.

He is not a million miles off the policies of previous republicans.

States will work together for the betterment of each other without the US if needs be.

Danzy wrote: »

It is much worse than being bullied, he wants them to buy their round.

They could handle being bullied, the other one causes greater problems.

The Post war consensus is over, like many things it lasted longer than the circumstances that it was created for.

This will never return, even if Trump is replaced by a Democrat in the next election.

The days of Dubya and Daddy, the interventionist politics of Hilary, all belong to a different era, an America that was the sole superpower.

States are going to have to stand more on their own feet.

So US is accepting that it now longer has the sole controlling role in the world? That is quite a stepchange and not something that I have seen discussed by either party?

The US has for years tried to portray it power through the influence of others. Be that NATO or whatever. What you are suggesting is that the US has given up on that idea and will retreat back into itself.

Again, that may or may not be the right thing to do, but I saw nowehere where the US has voted on that.