Donald Trump flips the script on foreign policy
 

In a striking role reversal, the Democratic nominee for president in 2016 is likely to be more of an internationalist, more supportive of free trade and, at least on paper, more hawkish than her Republican opponent.

George H.W. Bush was still popular because of his leadership during the Gulf War when Bill Clinton decided to challenge him in 1992. The then-Arkansas governor won by focusing on the economy, making the case that the country should turn inward and invest a post-Cold War peace dividend in domestic programs.

In 2016, Republican front-runner Donald Trump is trying to make a similar case. After 13 years of seeming quagmire in the Middle East, the billionaire businessman is promising to scale back the U.S. footprint overseas. And it is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who must persuade the American people on the importance of U.S. leadership in the world, to both keep us secure and ensure our prosperity.

“I don’t think we should be doing nation-building anymore,” he said. “I think it’s proven not to work. . . . I just think we have to rebuild our country.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...b92a22da5720d/

Stop meddling in the middle east and secure the goddam borders!

Trump 2016!

technically, Hillary flipped the script, she had already shown herself to be hawkish on the ME prior to Trump revealing his view.

he also believes NATO no longer makes sense.........


Donald Trump outlined an unabashedly noninterventionist approach to world affairs Monday, telling The Washington Post's editorial board that he questions the need for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which has formed the backbone of Western security policies since the Cold War.

Trump said he advocates a light footprint in the world. In spite of unrest abroad, especially in the Middle East, Trump said the United States must look inward and steer its resources toward rebuilding domestic infrastructure.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...shington-post/

who knows what he really believes tbh. to one crowd he sounds non-interventionist then speaking to aipac he was the worst hawk of the bunch.

plus his foreign policy team ... a banker, a war criminal and some other unknowns ...

NATO is fucking useless

bullshit. gun makers bro. would respectfully disagree with you. someone has to make those millions of guns that sit in lockers forever, ready to fight the soviets.

:winkwink:

I watched his AIPAC speech. You are being very disingenuous to say the least.

Trump calling for less wars and criticize NATO, which is a fucking useless orginization. He is completely on point here and i could not agree more.

While Hillary has the opposite view, which is the same of the last decades: Keep fighting the wars, in other words: Stick to the agenda of the establishment.


I wonder how the completely ignorant anti trump idiots will spin this one.

They'll somehow say Trump is "racist" for not supporting NATO :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I agree with this. US Presidents on both sides love going to war and it usually ends badly. WW2 was the last successful post-war, war.

Most Armies are until they're needed. Doing away with NATO is Putin's wet dream. getting out of the ME will just mean paying more for gas. And less in Western lives and taxes.

No, it just means that the U.S. won't be footing the bill for Europe anymore when it comes to the military. Which of course is YOUR nightmare... because then the country you live in has to figure out where the money is going to come from, and all of a sudden all that "Free" stuff the govt. is able to give you people will be gone.

No one would think British and American troops have been fighting shoulder to shoulder in US wars.

When was the last time NATO troops fought in Europe?

If you really believe the US fights in too many unnecessary wars, Trump is the only choice. He will build up the military so no saving on your taxes. Unless debt rockets.

Didn't Trump say we should in Syria? Carpet bomb them? Kill the families of Isis? And now he wants to pull back. I actually liked what he said recently. My only concern is when was he telling the truth?

I get that he is not a politician so he does not have strong views on this stuff. The only issue with that is that he is then a wild card on everything. He could go either way on anything.

Trump 2016!

How do you manage to imagine that those times contradict each other? :error:error:helpme

Firstly - scaling back does not mean completely quiting all operations, just oversee less operations.

Secondly - he wants to scale back on "nation building" etc, but not on terror related retaliations like in ISIS case.

Learn to read Paul.

I said PAY for the military in Europe. And you don't live in the UK so I wasn't talking about the British. I was talking about the mainland of Europe.

The countries there have tiny military budgets. The U.S. foots the majority of the bill for NATO. Which is why all those little European countries are able to have all the socialist free stuff for their citizens. When that comes to an end...so will the "free" stuff.

NATO was designed for the "Cold War" as a means to stop the Soviet Union from expanding across Europe.
This isn't the 1950's anymore.

Of course it has the fucking Turks in it :error:1orglaugh and now we promised them a fast track to EU. For 1000 years we tried to keep them out and now this ...Ataturk please come back....!

Funny watching guys like Cruz say that Trump is ignorant of foreign affairs wanting to pull back from NATO right before the bombings in Belgium.

I hope people realize that NATO doesn't help Belgium against crazy bombers in any way, shape, or form.

NATO is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization that says if one of the countries is attacked by another country...all the countries of NATO will come to fight. Completely designed as a threat to the old Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact of the Cold War in the 1950's and 1960's.

Doesn't do a damn thing about a handful of crazed muslims blowing themselves up in public to kill people.

Matter of fact NATO hasn't helped the U.S. since the first Gulf War back 26 years ago. It's pretty much a money pit for the American taxpayer to shovel money into while Defense Contractors shake hands with the crooked politicians in Washington D.C. (you know, the politicians with all that "experience" lol).