USA Foreign Policy

[hobbsyoyo]

The speech yesterday was prompted by a Congressional requirement that the President report to them a national defense strategy biannually. Presidents don't usually give this report with a speech and they typically skip it the first year in office*. I strongly feel that the speech was just so Trump could see himself on Fox & Friends today with the hosts gushing about how he's a strong, independent politician that don't need no Russian collusion.

*This bit should stand out because it shows that despite change over in administrations, the status quo was not to blindly throw out every.single.action taken by a predecessor in office.

 

[Berzerker]

The US had a helping hand over the years. International sanctions can be devastating.

Blaming the whole thing on Russia and China is silly.

The USA didn't prop up that dictatorship

 

[hobbsyoyo]

No they just propped up the belligerent dictorship next door until it reformed itself and played a hand in starving people within North Korea.

 

[Takhisis]

This is a much more aggressive and combative stance

You seem to equate ‘aggressive and combative’ with ‘good’.

The Koreans were ready to set up the PRK, People's Republic of Korea, which would have been pretty awesome, a democratic socialist state that covered all of Korea, until the US set up its own military government, and dissolved the PRK provisional government in the south. The Soviets quickly infiltrated and co-opted the PRK government in the north and replaced it with a Stalinist puppet state. Blaming the whole thing on Russia and China is silly.

Kim Il-Sung was only barely kept from starting a new war there and then by Soviet pressure. To be honest, after the instances of ‘democratic’ elections witnessed in Poland that same year, and the coup that took place in Czechoslovakia the following year, and events in Hungary, and the ongoing war in Greece, I don't think any sort of free elections would have been tenable then.
Of course the anti-Red paranoia that led to McCarthyism and so on was completely unjustified, and the dictatorship of the enemy does not justify the one on our side, but let's take things in perspective.

 

[onejayhawk]

You seem to equate ‘aggressive and combative’ with ‘good’.

Just different. Aggressive and combative by itself gets you nothing. If, as some are surely claiming, it is an attitude that deals with reality frankly, then it is a good thing. Hence the term realpolitik. However, such realism is unproven.

J

 

[Berzerker]

No they just propped up the belligerent dictorship next door until it reformed itself and played a hand in starving people within North Korea.

and we should feel bad about how SK turned out? I was blaming China and Russia for NK, they should feel bad about that...if they cared about the NK people

 

[hobbsyoyo]

No, I'm pointing out that incomplete readings of history paint a very lopsided and skewed picture of the present.

 

[Berzerker]

You're talking about events in the '50s, I'm talking about what happened since - the crime called NK belongs to the Chinese and Russians

 

[Lexicus]

Of course the anti-Red paranoia that led to McCarthyism and so on was completely unjustified, and the dictatorship of the enemy does not justify the one on our side, but let's take things in perspective.

Yes. In many ways the Stalinists are the mirror image of the far-right anti-communists.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

You're talking about events in the '50s, I'm talking about what happened since - the crime called NK belongs to the Chinese and Russians

Lol wut

You just said:

The USA didn't prop up that dictatorship

The Russian and Chinese support of NK has been going in since the 50's until today. It's almost like you don't know what you're trying to argue.

 

[Broken_Erika]

The US says it "will be taking names" during a UN General Assembly vote on a resolution criticising its recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

The world had better not defy the US and Israel on Jerusalem or else!
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42424666

 

[Arakhor]

Taking names? Hah. How about starting with the entire UN Security Council?

 

[Broken_Erika]

Taking names? Hah. How about starting with the entire UN Security Council?

Makin' a list, Checkin' it twice, Gonna find out who's Nazi and Nice!

 

[Lexicus]

Wait, is this the thread where we're talking about how Trump is weakening the US? This is why, because the election of Trump means that every country in the world knows they can't count on the US population not to do something totally, mind-bogglingly stupid.

 

[Broken_Erika]

And The US has served notice that if any nation criticizes any of Trumps Brilliant policies there can and will be Repercussions.
Now every nation in the world must bow to its new orange deity or be declared a terrorist state!

 

[onejayhawk]

Makin' a list, Checkin' it twice, Gonna find out who's Nazi and Nice!

That was clever. A lot of people compare Muslim nations to fascists, but the jingle makes it cute.

J

 

[Broken_Erika]

That was clever. A lot of people compare Muslim nations to fascists, but the jingle makes it cute.

J

I got it from a Robot Chicken Sketch. Schindlers List 2: Schindlers Pissed.

 

[Berzerker]

Lol wut

You just said:

The Russian and Chinese support of NK has been going in since the 50's until today. It's almost like you don't know what you're trying to argue.

I said Russia and China have been supporting NK since the 50s, not the USA. You even quoted me:

You're talking about events in the '50s, I'm talking about what happened since - the crime called NK belongs to the Chinese and Russians

The USA didn't prop up that dictatorship

How are those two comments in conflict? You're blaming the USA for NKs sad state and I'm blaming the Russians and Chinese. Its almost like you dont know what I'm trying to argue, you just repeated what I said as if I never said it.

 

[onejayhawk]

Here is an Asia Times reaction to the National Defense speech, cited several times above. It does not mince words.

In so many words, Trump’s 67-page summary of national security policy declares that America is a frog that will not be boiled. No doubt the report will be portrayed as war-like, although that is not its intention. “Competition does not always mean hostility, nor does it inevitably lead to conflict – although none should doubt our commitment to defend our interests. An America that successfully competes is the best way to prevent conflict. Just as American weakness invites challenge, American strength and confidence deters war and promotes peace,” the document states.

The contrast with the two previous administrations is stark. The Trump report praises American values and institutions but betrays no ambition to remake the world in America’s image after the fashion of George W. Bush. Nor does it accept the slow decline of American influence into a geopolitical mush of multilateralism per the “soft power” conceit of the Obama Administration. It is centered on the American economy, the American homeland, and American interests, but it proposes a rough-edged activism where American interests are threatened that will make the world a less predictable place during the next several years.

The report admonishes China and Russia on a number of grounds. Beijing and Moscow will take the report in stride, gauging carefully where Washington might alter the strategic balance. But the new report will cause alarm in Tehran. For the past dozen years – since Robert Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld as America’s Defense Secretary in 2006 – American policy has sought to include Iran in the regional security architecture. The Trump Administration’s strongest language is directed towards Iran, and the Shi’ite regime’s response is incalculable. Some analysts believe that Iran already is inclined to go to war with Israel, and the new report may prompt the militaries of several Middle Eastern nations to raise their level of alert.​

http://www.atimes.com/article/trump-offers-daring-program-restore-us-dominance/

The frog reference may confuse some. If a frog is tossed into dangerously hot water, it will struggle greatly to escape. However, if the water is slowly heated, the frog will allow itself to be cooked.

J

 

[hobbsyoyo]

How are those two comments in conflict?

I didn't say they were in conflict, you did.

The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation of a victim by the main character in the 1938 stage play Gas Light, known as Angel Street in the United States, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944.[7] In the story, a husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is insane by manipulating small elements of their environment and insisting that she is mistaken, remembering things incorrectly, or delusional when she points out these changes.

Its almost like you dont know what I'm trying to argue, you just repeated what I said as if I never said it.

I don't know what you're trying to argue because you aren't making a lick of sense.