Anyone figured out what President Trump's foreign policy is yet?

archives

Verified User
other than outsourcing the North Korea issue to China, achieving what was predictable results, and, sending four thousand troops into what one hundred thousand troops couldn't do, do we have any notion or hint at what President Trump's strategy is to pursue American interests and how to achieve these seemingly top secret goals within the international arena?

I can remember conservatives being all over President Obama about his foreign policy strategy, even after he explained them umpteen times, yet, nothing from the right nor their media on what exactly is President Trump's foreign policy.

Maybe a conservative can help us out
 
other than outsourcing the North Korea issue to China, achieving what was predictable results, and, sending four thousand troops into what one hundred thousand troops couldn't do, do we have any notion or hint at what President Trump's strategy is to pursue American interests and how to achieve these seemingly top secret goals within the international arena?

I can remember conservatives being all over President Obama about his foreign policy strategy, even after he explained them umpteen times, yet, nothing from the right nor their media on what exactly is President Trump's foreign policy.

Maybe a conservative can help us out

The 4000 troops are to back up the ones Obama left there. What do you not understand about that?
 
The 4000 troops are to back up the ones Obama left there. What do you not understand about that?

I, and apparently you, don't understand what the polocy is, what role does the additional troops play in an overall strategy, what overall foreign policy does it reflect?
 
trump5.png
 
Why didn't Obama DO anything when the fat guy was shooting off missiles like fireworks? He should've brought China on board 8 years ago.
 
Anatta loves it, even the conflicting parts. Even the parts in the future that conflict with what he says today.

Trump cabana boy.
 
logistical and fire support for the Raqqa assault. I read US marines are setting up howitzers for ex.

NK is going to take awhile to solve - recall Obama's "strategic deterrence" was much like his ME policy-
standing around and dissing our Sunni allies..

There is no doubt Hillary would have had us deep in Syria by now -her "no fly zone" at least
( the same thing that was the beginning of the Libyan intervention- a continuing disaster) if not more ground support for the FSA -who cannot hold their weapons
 
Trump's foreign policy is basically do what Obama did, but with less savvy and more erratic and disjointed rhetoric, and with less focus and leadership in the area of human rights. Trump isn't even running his foreign policy, which is some relief because I seriously doubt he could find any country outside of America on a map. He didn't realize that Israel was in the Middle East ('Hey Israel, I just came back from the Middle East...'). Trump is totally hands-off when it comes to military decisions -- which gives him the ability to both blame the generals and take credit for their successes.

Trump still thinks that Russia could be an ally in terrorism, when Russia has been the chief operator in undermining USA on terrorism (especially with regard to Assad on Syria).
 
other than outsourcing the North Korea issue to China, achieving what was predictable results, and, sending four thousand troops into what one hundred thousand troops couldn't do, do we have any notion or hint at what President Trump's strategy is to pursue American interests and how to achieve these seemingly top secret goals within the international arena?

I can remember conservatives being all over President Obama about his foreign policy strategy, even after he explained them umpteen times, yet, nothing from the right nor their media on what exactly is President Trump's foreign policy.

Maybe a conservative can help us out

I think I can identify the source of your confusion. You are obviously looking for some sort of pattern, some consistency, which would reveal an underlying strategy. That is misguided. The Trumpy had declared, early and often, that consistency is for suckers, and he aims at being erratic, and unpredictable. That obviously requires there be no "American interest" in any discernible way, other than the Trumpy's ever changing answer to his persistent question, "What do I get out of it?" It's a whole new era, Archives, and you are supposed to adjust your thinking to the changing reality.

That said, there are certain characteristics of this new era that can be made out. Here's a start:

In the EU, NATO, the UN, numerous trade treaties, or the Paris Agreement, the Trumpy sees so many gangings-up on the poor, widdle U.S., and thus he aims at undermining, and ultimately destroying, these institutions, detrimental to, and meant to exploit, the U.S. Looking at that trajectory, it's just a matter of time (if Bannon hasn't already informed him on that) until the Trumpy will identify the international post-WWII order as largely constructed by, but wholly aimed to weaken, the U.S. Draw your conclusions. The most obvious one, the "author" of The Art of the Deal will, once his mission to divide up the world into individual bit players is complete, make deals so splendid, so beneficial, so profitable, you'll soon tire of seeing terrific deals being made on a daily basis.

Other than that, he does what a real leader is supposed to do, he'll delegate the minor stuff to his underlings, solving Syria is for the Russians to accomplish, the Chinese will have to deal with North Korea, Israel is going to make peace on her own, climate change will take care of itself as it has always done, and, overall, the Pentagon and the senior military staff will be in charge of troop deployments. Minor stuff, as I said, while the Trumpy will occasionally make the rubble bounce in splendid fireworks to celebrate American Greatness, as he did at that Syrian airfield.
 
Trump's foreign policy is basically do what Obama did, but with less savvy and more erratic and disjointed rhetoric, and with less focus and leadership in the area of human rights. Trump isn't even running his foreign policy, which is some relief because I seriously doubt he could find any country outside of America on a map. He didn't realize that Israel was in the Middle East ('Hey Israel, I just came back from the Middle East...'). Trump is totally hands-off when it comes to military decisions -- which gives him the ability to both blame the generals and take credit for their successes.

Trump still thinks that Russia could be an ally in terrorism, when Russia has been the chief operator in undermining USA on terrorism (especially with regard to Assad on Syria).
grotesque misunderstanding of Syria.
US is not really a player. we arm up some supposedly"secularist" rebels, (FSA types) -but they are the weakest on the battlefield.
Take the old FSA under General Idris -we armed hime up in Jordan they went into Syria and they were kidnapped or killed and their weapons caches seized.
The US has no reliable proxie, so we need to stay out of that game.

Russia backs Assad, but so does Hezbollah ,and Iranian Qods forces; and Syria is a Russian client state with Russia now have airbases, as well as Tartus to support.

Ideally we stay the hell out of that cauldron- it's not ours to influence.

Lobbing in some Tomahawk cruise missiles like Trump did is as far as we go.
We don't need another bombing campaign like Libya that created a failed terrorist state.
 
grotesque misunderstanding of Syria.
US is not really a player. we arm up some supposedly"secularist" rebels, (FSA types) -but they are the weakest on the battlefield.
Take the old FSA under General Idris -we armed hime up in Jordan they went into Syria and they were kidnapped or killed and their weapons caches seized.
The US has no reliable proxie, so we need to stay out of that game.

Russia backs Assad, but so does Hezbollah ,and Iranian Qods forces; and Syria is a Russian client state with Russia now have airbases, as well as Tartus to support.

Ideally we stay the hell out of that cauldron- it's not ours to influence.

Lobbing in some Tomahawk cruise missiles like Trump did is as far as we go.
We don't need another bombing campaign like Libya that created a failed terrorist state.

Assad has directly facilitated the growth and expansion of ISIS. His plan was to bolster the threat of ISIS so that the people would ultimately choose him. Hence why he released Jihadist prisoners into the conflict when the moderate faction was gaining traction.
 
Trump's foreign policy should be no mystery to anyone that pays attention.

He puts US interests first [there's a novel idea lol] and sets out to protect US citizens. Trump has tried to entice China to reign in NK because they are a threat to American voters---whether it's been successful so far, is immaterial, since the objective here is demonstrate Trump's foreign policy.

He rallied the Arab states recently in his aim to garner a peace accord between Israel and the Palestinians. Again, there's no reason to think Trump's foreign policy is a big mystery, even though nothing has come of that aspect, yet anyway. He's only six months in.

They got pissy over it, but Trump basically single handedly got Western Europe to pony-up on NATO. Trump would like to partner with Putin on ISIS but has been impeded by the lefts absurd Russian obsession.

This is pretty easy, actually.
 
Assad has directly facilitated the growth and expansion of ISIS. His plan was to bolster the threat of ISIS so that the people would ultimately choose him. Hence why he released Jihadist prisoners into the conflict when the moderate faction was gaining traction.
ridiculous. ISIS is a threat to the regime.
not as much as the Islamists like al-Nusra but no way does he seek to bolster ISIS.

He is Alawite, a small but significant Shi'a sect in Syria and was already in charge when the Syrian Civil war broke out.
 
Trump's foreign policy should be no mystery to anyone that pays attention.

He puts US interests first [there's a novel idea lol] and sets out to protect US citizens. Trump has tried to entice China to reign in NK because they are a threat to American voters---whether it's been successful so far, is immaterial, since the objective here is demonstrate Trump's foreign policy.

He rallied the Arab states recently in his aim to garner a peace accord between Israel and the Palestinians. Again, there's no reason to think Trump's foreign policy is a big mystery, even though nothing has come of that aspect, yet anyway. He's only six months in.

They got pissy over it, but Trump basically single handedly got Western Europe to pony-up on NATO. Trump would like to partner with Putin on ISIS but has been impeded by the lefts absurd Russian obsession.

This is pretty easy, actually.
Ya. NATO is paying up, and we still cooperate w/Russia on terrorism.
But that crap Trump got when he notified Serge Lavrov ( Russian FM) about the laptop bombs when he visited
the White House -along with our generalized Russiaphpobia puts that relationship at less then desired levels too.
 
ridiculous. ISIS is a threat to the regime.
not as much as the Islamists like al-Nusra but no way does he seek to bolster ISIS.

He is Alawite, a small but significant Shi'a sect in Syria and was already in charge when the Syrian Civil war broke out.

The facts actually refute your refutation. Unfortunately, you've pre-emptively labeled all media reports that disagree with your points as 'fake news' (great way to win a debate against yourself). So trying to convince you that Assad and Putin are bad actors is like trying to nail J-ello to the wall, or drown an ocean. Back to RT you go.
 
Back
Top