Trump’s Foreign-Policy Critics Are Losing

[anatta]

As if all 9 zillion 2020 Democratic presidential candidates don’t have enough problems – promising to take away your health care, free college for all, open borders – they now have a new line of attack against President Trump: criticizing his national security credentials.

You must be joking.

take for instance a recent interview by former Vice President Joe Biden to CNN, where be declared that Trump is “[E]mbracing thugs. He's embracing Kim Jong Un, who is a thug. He's embracing Putin, who is a – who is a flat dictator. He's embracing people who, in fact – and he's stiff-arming our friends. He's threatening NATO, to pull out of NATO. I mean, come on.”

But Biden did not stop there. “If he wins re-election, I promise you there will be no NATO in four years or five years.”

Biden’s line of attack was pretty mild compared to others. “I think this has been the President Trump appeasement tour,” explained Hillary Clinton's 2016 running mate Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., appearing on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Kaine went on to proclaim Trump’s walk into North Korea as “him going to North Korea is like Chamberlain going to talk to Hitler.”

^ That’s just crazy talk.

And these remarks only scratch the surface when it comes to rants over what are clearly Trump’s foreign policy successes. Democrats are, in fact, opening themselves up for attack, trying to take on the president in the area of national security.

Here’s why: Agree or disagree on the policy choices, Trump has taken on the hard problems while staying true to his promise to the American people that he would put their interests first. This is something the Obama administration failed to do time and time again.

Russia? Let’s take the wind out of the sails of the Democrats’ favorite national security topic for the last two years, because the record here is clear: No one has done more to contain and diminish the threat coming from Russia than President Trump (except perhaps Ronald Reagan).

Agree or disagree on the policy choices, Trump has taken on the hard problems while staying true to his promise to the American people that he would put their interests first.

From rebuilding our nation's military, to increased economic sanctions to arming Ukraine and working to ensure NATO members put the money they need into their military budgets, Trump has ensured that Moscow knows America will not sit idle if they decide to launch another foolish cyber-attack on our election system or strike a sovereign nation and annex their territory. Quite simply, Trump is trying to deter Russia from making trouble before it starts – and that’s a smart strategy.

North Korea? Perhaps the greatest national security crisis of our time, thanks to President Obama and Joe Biden. Their policy of strategic patience – or what I like to call strategic appeasement – was nothing more than Team Obama avoiding a difficult problem, one with no easy solution that nearly every president before wanted to avoid or neglect. What that “strategic patience” got us was eight years of Pyongyang laying groundwork for deadly hydrogen bombs that can now be placed on long-range missiles that can hit the U.S. homeland.

Trump did not cower in the face of the challenge but took North Korea on even before he became president, calling them to task on Twitter. He then placed tough economic sanctions on the regime but also honored his campaign promise to talk to Chairman Kim Jong Un and open a dialogue to lower tensions. Imagine if President Obama had done the same back in 2009 when he took office? Wasn’t it then-candidate Obama who said he would talk to our enemies? So, what happened?

And let’s not forget China. While the foreign policy geniuses here in Washington would tell you Beijing’s rise is inevitable and that we should accommodate it – while they steal our intellectual property, trillions in dollars of military secrets and even 20 million government personnel files – Trump had different plans. He not only has called out China’s mercantilist trade practices but imposed tariffs on Beijing when the New York banking elites and Wall Street fat cats said it was financial suicide. And while we don’t have a trade deal just yet, one thing is clear: Beijing finally knows America must be taken seriously and that the days of unfair trade practices are long gone.

And finally, NATO. Yes, the president has been very clear that our allies must ensure they are paying at least 2 percent of their GDP on defense spending – the amount all NATO nations have pledged to do. This has been something Trump has been relentless on, calling NATO nations to task even during NATO meetings with the whole world watching – and making the elites cringe in the process. And lo and behold, NATO has begun spending more on its common defense, as in $100 billion more in allocated funds by the end of the year. That is something President Trump can take credit for, as Europe’s defense is now in much better shape thanks to his tough-love approach.

While I could go on and on, there is a clear pattern here: regardless of whether you like his policies or the way Trump goes about them this administration is not afraid to tackle the hardest national security challenges – the challenges the mainstream media, pundit class, and the previous administration decided were just too tough to tackle.

Trump has not only proved them wrong but delivered for the American people time and time again.

So, I say let the Democrats run on national security in 2020. It won’t work out well for them.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/harr...ity-trump-wins

[Darth Omar]

As if all 9 zillion 2020 Democratic presidential candidates don’t have enough problems – promising to take away your health care, free college for all, open borders – they now have a new line of attack against President Trump: criticizing his national security credentials.

You must be joking.

take for instance a recent interview by former Vice President Joe Biden to CNN, where be declared that Trump is “[E]mbracing thugs. He's embracing Kim Jong Un, who is a thug. He's embracing Putin, who is a – who is a flat dictator. He's embracing people who, in fact – and he's stiff-arming our friends. He's threatening NATO, to pull out of NATO. I mean, come on.”

But Biden did not stop there. “If he wins re-election, I promise you there will be no NATO in four years or five years.”

Biden’s line of attack was pretty mild compared to others. “I think this has been the President Trump appeasement tour,” explained Hillary Clinton's 2016 running mate Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., appearing on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Kaine went on to proclaim Trump’s walk into North Korea as “him going to North Korea is like Chamberlain going to talk to Hitler.”

^ That’s just crazy talk.

And these remarks only scratch the surface when it comes to rants over what are clearly Trump’s foreign policy successes. Democrats are, in fact, opening themselves up for attack, trying to take on the president in the area of national security.

Here’s why: Agree or disagree on the policy choices, Trump has taken on the hard problems while staying true to his promise to the American people that he would put their interests first. This is something the Obama administration failed to do time and time again.

Russia? Let’s take the wind out of the sails of the Democrats’ favorite national security topic for the last two years, because the record here is clear: No one has done more to contain and diminish the threat coming from Russia than President Trump (except perhaps Ronald Reagan).

Agree or disagree on the policy choices, Trump has taken on the hard problems while staying true to his promise to the American people that he would put their interests first.

From rebuilding our nation's military, to increased economic sanctions to arming Ukraine and working to ensure NATO members put the money they need into their military budgets, Trump has ensured that Moscow knows America will not sit idle if they decide to launch another foolish cyber-attack on our election system or strike a sovereign nation and annex their territory. Quite simply, Trump is trying to deter Russia from making trouble before it starts – and that’s a smart strategy.

North Korea? Perhaps the greatest national security crisis of our time, thanks to President Obama and Joe Biden. Their policy of strategic patience – or what I like to call strategic appeasement – was nothing more than Team Obama avoiding a difficult problem, one with no easy solution that nearly every president before wanted to avoid or neglect. What that “strategic patience” got us was eight years of Pyongyang laying groundwork for deadly hydrogen bombs that can now be placed on long-range missiles that can hit the U.S. homeland.

Trump did not cower in the face of the challenge but took North Korea on even before he became president, calling them to task on Twitter. He then placed tough economic sanctions on the regime but also honored his campaign promise to talk to Chairman Kim Jong Un and open a dialogue to lower tensions. Imagine if President Obama had done the same back in 2009 when he took office? Wasn’t it then-candidate Obama who said he would talk to our enemies? So, what happened?

And let’s not forget China. While the foreign policy geniuses here in Washington would tell you Beijing’s rise is inevitable and that we should accommodate it – while they steal our intellectual property, trillions in dollars of military secrets and even 20 million government personnel files – Trump had different plans. He not only has called out China’s mercantilist trade practices but imposed tariffs on Beijing when the New York banking elites and Wall Street fat cats said it was financial suicide. And while we don’t have a trade deal just yet, one thing is clear: Beijing finally knows America must be taken seriously and that the days of unfair trade practices are long gone.

And finally, NATO. Yes, the president has been very clear that our allies must ensure they are paying at least 2 percent of their GDP on defense spending – the amount all NATO nations have pledged to do. This has been something Trump has been relentless on, calling NATO nations to task even during NATO meetings with the whole world watching – and making the elites cringe in the process. And lo and behold, NATO has begun spending more on its common defense, as in $100 billion more in allocated funds by the end of the year. That is something President Trump can take credit for, as Europe’s defense is now in much better shape thanks to his tough-love approach.

While I could go on and on, there is a clear pattern here: regardless of whether you like his policies or the way Trump goes about them this administration is not afraid to tackle the hardest national security challenges – the challenges the mainstream media, pundit class, and the previous administration decided were just too tough to tackle.

Trump has not only proved them wrong but delivered for the American people time and time again.

So, I say let the Democrats run on national security in 2020. It won’t work out well for them.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/harr...ity-trump-wins

I’d give Trump a solid B on foreign policy.

The only reason it’s not an A is because we are still in Afghanistan. This is one of those instances when I wish Trump really was an autocrat that would say ‘we’re pulling out boys’ and get the heck out of there.

He earns the solid B for finally turning the corner on the Eternal War madness. Trump ran on ‘no more stupid wars’ and, so far at least, he’s stuck to his guns. But the last three years have been an eye-opener in terms of how entrenched the eternal war addicts are in the State Department and DOD.

Trump needs four more years to root them out so we can have a lasting change in our relationship with the world. With the exception of Gabbard, none of these democrat newbies have the slightest clue about what they would be up against as president.

In fact, we should have an ‘insurance policy’ in the unfortunate event one of them actually gets elected. The situation is exactly that dire. Maybe Trump and Barr should get on that.

[StoneByStone]

Remember when Americans loved their country more than they hated people they disagreed with, so it wasn't all about who was winning or losing? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Personally, I don't think Trump's foreign policy has been good at all, but I'm not happy about that. I don't take joy in knowing that it's bad for Trump. I want better for America and the world.

[anatta]

Remember when Americans loved their country more than they hated people they disagreed with, so it wasn't all about who was winning or losing? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Personally, I don't think Trump's foreign policy has been good at all, but I'm not happy about that. I don't take joy in knowing that it's bad for Trump. I want better for America and the world.

you could flesh out your ideas into more then "personally i feel" with no attributions to specifics

[Darth Omar]

Remember when Americans loved their country more than they hated people they disagreed with, so it wasn't all about who was winning or losing? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Personally, I don't think Trump's foreign policy has been good at all, but I'm not happy about that. I don't take joy in knowing that it's bad for Trump. I want better for America and the world.

Why don’t you flesh that out a bit lol.

What sucks about Trump’s foreign policy?

[anatta]

I’d give Trump a solid B on foreign policy.

The only reason it’s not an A is because we are still in Afghanistan. This is one of those instances when I wish Trump really was an autocrat that would say ‘we’re pulling out boys’ and get the heck out of there.

He earns the solid B for finally turning the corner on the Eternal War madness. Trump ran on ‘no more stupid wars’ and, so far at least, he’s stuck to his guns. But the last three years have been an eye-opener in terms of how entrenched the eternal war addicts are in the State Department and DOD.

Trump needs four more years to root them out so we can have a lasting change in our relationship with the world. With the exception of Gabbard, none of these democrat newbies have the slightest clue about what they would be up against as president.

In fact, we should have an ‘insurance policy’ in the unfortunate event one of them actually gets elected. The situation is exactly that dire. Maybe Trump and Barr should get on that.

whatever grade, it's unfinished.

I have no idea what the Iran policy is except maximum pressure -maybe Trump is just screwing with the mullahs
But the economic pressure is real.

As far as the rest, the OP goes onto policy,but not the trade agreements.
They MUST get finished or ratified in the case of NAFTA 2

This is a golden opportunity with our economy humming to bludgeon them with tariffs to change the Chinese behavior.
We know they are trying to out-wait Trump's presidency. Re-election means they have to deal
and part of the deal is verification and enforcement

Then immigration...a whole other bad bag of tricks to sort out

[Darth Omar]

you could flesh out your ideas into more then "personally i feel" with no attributions to specifics

Ok that was weird lol.

[jimmymccready]

The OP is opposite to what is really happening.

Trump’s Foreign-Policy Critics Are Losing

[anatta]

Ok that was weird lol.

my syntax? could be..It's dawn and I just did a morning number..Strange days indeed

[anatta]

The OP is opposite to what is really happening.

Trump’s Foreign-Policy Critics Are Losing

now there we go..more low hanging fruit..I pass on this nothingness

[jimmymccready]

We picked your low hanging fruit, anatta, and fed it to the pigs.

Trump is a foreign-policy nightmare for humanity.

[Darth Omar]

whatever grade, it's unfinished.

I have no idea what the Iran policy is except maximum pressure -maybe Trump is just screwing with the mullahs
But the economic pressure is real.

As far as the rest, the OP goes onto policy,but not the trade agreements.
They MUST get finished or ratified in the case of NAFTA 2

This is a golden opportunity with our economy humming to bludgeon them with tariffs to change the Chinese behavior.
We know they are trying to out-wait Trump's presidency. Re-election means they have to deal
and part of the deal is verification and enforcement

Then immigration...a whole other bad bag of tricks to sort out

Well, you have to give him a *preliminary* grade and I think Trump has earned a B.

Of course, things can go South in a minute but so far so good. My biggest concern was Stupid Wars and, thus far, Trump has steered clear of them. He ran on doing away with the Iran deal [since they were going to cheat] and he did away with it. I’m ok with the Maximum Pressure bit though I agree the strategic goal is unclear.

Does anyone have a clear strategic goal with Iran? Was there ever one under Trump’s predecessors? The only one I can think of is supporting an uprising against the mullahs. Bombs? Hell no.

[Darth Omar]

We picked your low hanging fruit, anatta, and fed it to the pigs.

Trump is a foreign-policy nightmare for humanity.

How so?

[anatta]

We picked your low hanging fruit, anatta, and fed it to the pigs.

Trump is a foreign-policy nightmare for humanity.

ROFL..you mean like Libya still today?
U.S. made Qaddafi into a military target and droned him towards his gruesome death

There's your nightmare on earth, though I doubt you got a clue except for the new slave markets - Obama/Hillary turned it into the failed terrorist state it is today.

suck on those lemons

[anatta]

Well, you have to give him a *preliminary* grade and I think Trump has earned a B.

Of course, things can go South in a minute but so far so good. My biggest concern was Stupid Wars and, thus far, Trump has steered clear of them. He ran on doing away with the Iran deal [since they were going to cheat] and he did away with it. I’m ok with the Maximum Pressure bit though I agree the strategic goal is unclear.

Does anyone have a clear strategic goal with Iran? Was there ever one under Trump’s predecessors? The only one I can think of is supporting an uprising against the mullahs. Bombs? Hell no.

no clear goals I can think of except foment revolution...but we've never turned the screws so far either .
We do know Iran hasn't been subsidizing it's terrorists proxies . Hez was appealing for money.

No wars is yuge! GTFO of Syria as well.. get this country running on all cylinders..Yankee Doodle