ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
I guess folks view me as a Trumper which I am not but I think the comments are irresponsible and would add in his comment on Nikki Haley's husband as disgusting . Though I would support if he said we should suspend Nato members that do not contribute 2% till they do .
As for Luciom on this
NATO countries have been increasing military spending following the ukraine invasion
I disagree that may have been true for a few countries but some of those are pulling back. They are pulling back because they know the USA will always be there .
Nobody really cares. What he says is basically noise to his supporters. If he wins he’ll just watch TV and be cruel to undesirables.
If no one cares, what is the point of saying it? You think he and/or his advisors have misjudged? Or you agree that the comments were just made to scare our allies into spending more?
Saying that Russia should invade NATO countries that don't pay up is like saying to an extremist on the other side "If you feel that way I don't want your vote". I worry about people who don't realize this. (Second sentence is a third example).
'
No wonder Europe will trust the US less and less with individual like trump .
Just blow my mind how many can’t even see how economically it can be very bad for the US .
The « west order » of the world , backed by the U.S. dollars is massively beneficial to the US .
And NATO is obv. A piece of that order …
But like usual trump and MAGA focus on details making a big deal of what it really isn’t ….
It’s represent almost nothing in us budget military , especially when u can print the money almost to infinity…
The man notorious for not paying bills, threatening people for not paying their bills. Lovely.
Not a trumper but i suppose you think i am one so i will answer that.
Being a credible madman works in game theory to accomplish stuff you can't otherwise accomplish ("credible threat of irrational action" and all that).
Basically if you agree that pushing EU countries to spend more for defense is a worthwhile goal (that's a different topic which i understand not everyone will agree with), then whatever works to bring that about is a positive
This is wrong-headed for a number of reasons.
First, I see a big difference between acting like a credible madman with respect to your adversaries as opposed to an allies.
Second, it's way too simplistic to say that any action that increases EU defense spending strengthens NATO. Sure, you caused certain countries to increase defense spending, but you did so by raising doubts about whether the U.S. will stand by its NATO allies. It is far from obvious to me that the tradeoff strengthens NATO.
Third, you are ignoring the elephant in the room. For better or worse, U.S. leadership in the Western world depends on the U.S. having a stable government and the U.S. having a predictable foreign policy. The combined effect of the deterioration of U.S. democracy and Trump's diplomatic style is that much of Western world no longer trusts the U.S. to drive the car. That diminishes U.S. influence. If you are Victor, maybe you think that is an improvement, although I doubt he trusts Germany at the wheel (or a driverless car) any more than he trusts the U.S. at the wheel.
Trump has done more to strengthen NATO than any POTUS in quite awhile.
I would say he put the most pressure on countries to step up and contribute 2% Its almost like we could have a NATO thread
As I explained above, that's an overly simplistic way to measure the strength of NATO imo. I think a fair and honest summary of Trump's overall message to the world on NATO would be:
"I don't see that much value to the United States in NATO, and for that reason, I really don't like the idea of the U.S. bearing what I view as a disproportionate share of the financial burden."
And FWIW, I think that messaging is consistent with how Trump actually feels about NATO.
As I explained above, that's an overly simplistic way to measure the strength of NATO imo. I think a fair and honest summary of Trump's overall message to the world on NATO would be:
"I don't see that much value to the United States in NATO, and for that reason, I really don't like the idea of the U.S. bearing what I view as a disproportionate share of the financial burden."
And FWIW, I think that messaging is consistent with how Trump actua
In all honesty is he 100% wrong ? Take Ukraine which I get is not a NATO country why must the US take the largest Burden ?
As well I do not know all the history of NATO I get why it was created but when the Soviet Union fell did the USA not promise Russia not to expand NATO?
you don't know what 'liberals' means do you?
As I explained above, that's an overly simplistic way to measure the strength of NATO imo. I think a fair and honest summary of Trump's overall message to the world on NATO would be:
"I don't see that much value to the United States in NATO, and for that reason, I really don't like the idea of the U.S. bearing what I view as a disproportionate share of the financial burden."
And FWIW, I think that messaging is consistent with how Trump actua
You give Trump too much credit phrasing his thinking in terms of US interests.
His thought is more like “you guys don’t like me and dont give me money ao why should I protect you?”
All that NATO has to do is announce routine arms deals in terms of giving Trump the credit and Trump will be all for NATO even if the deals represent zero incremental spending.
You give Trump too much credit phrasing his thinking in terms of US interests.
His thought is more like “you guys don’t like me and dont give me money ao why should I protect you?”
All that NATO has to do is announce routine arms deals in terms of giving Trump the credit and Trump will be all for NATO even if the deals represent zero incremental spending.
give him some preferred branding licenses in NATO countries and he'd be 100% in.
Not a trumper but i suppose you think i am one so i will answer that.
Being a credible madman works in game theory to accomplish stuff you can't otherwise accomplish ("credible threat of irrational action" and all that).
Yeah, that's why when he said if "Rocket Man" keeps launching missiles, "North Korea will be met with fire, fury, and power, the likes of which the world has never seen before," and then Kim responds to that message by launching a missile over Japan showing the world what kind of paper tiger Trump is 🤣
Yeah, that's why when he said if "Rocket Man" keeps launching missiles, "North Korea will be met with fire, fury, and power, the likes of which the world has never seen before," and then Kim responds to that message by launching a missile over Japan showing the world what kind of paper tiger Trump is 🤣
Trump very specifically said the quote you cite *if rocket man kept threatening the USA* . Which btw he stopped doing afaik
You give Trump too much credit phrasing his thinking in terms of US interests.
His thought is more like “you guys don’t like me and dont give me money ao why should I protect you?”
All that NATO has to do is announce routine arms deals in terms of giving Trump the credit and Trump will be all for NATO even if the deals represent zero incremental spending.
Fair enough. My description of the messaging is correct, but you probably did a better job of describing Trump's actual views.
Trump very specifically said the quote you cite *if rocket man kept threatening the USA* . Which btw he stopped doing afaik
True. I forgot how it was much worse. Hours after he made his speech, Kim responded by making another threat and Trump showed the world how much of a paper tiger he is:
North Korea said on Wednesday it is “carefully examining” a plan to attack the US Pacific territory of Guam with missiles, just hours after US President Donald Trump told North Korea that any threat to the United States would meet “fire and fury”
Then two weeks later he launched a missile over Japan.
Okay, now tell us how that the US territory of Guam isn't what Trump meant just like Trump didn't really mean using disinfectants in the lungs to treat covid when he said to use disinfectants in the lungs to treat covid 🤣
In all honesty is he 100% wrong ? Take Ukraine which I get is not a NATO country why must the US take the largest Burden ?
As well I do not know all the history of NATO I get why it was created but when the Soviet Union fell did the USA not promise Russia not to expand NATO?
Gorbatchev himself said no such deal was done but even if it’s true or not , it certainly didn’t permit Russia to expand either .
US don’t ask them to join nato , it’s countries feeling threatened by Russia that ask to join nato for protection .
Yeah tell that to Putin lol .
He thought because of trump , nato got weaker and so he decided to invade ukrayne .
Thx to biden being there regardless the 2% which is almost meaningless…
So how do you explain them taking Crimea under Obama?
So under two Democratic Presidents Russia invades Ukraine and under Trump they do nothing . Keep spouting BS
