Trump abandons Kurdish allies to Turkish invasion

[Zombie]

Yeah. I haven't read much about it but I guess she has refused to condemn Assad and I'm curious as to why. Seems easy enough to say that he's crossed the line several times.

Her foreign policy is just weird tbh. Like, people are talking about her as if she's saying something radical wrt US noninterventionism, but Warren for example has always opposed us supporting SA in Yemen, and voted against our actions in Syria, but managed to do it without defending Assad.

Why Tulsi gets extra credit here is beyond me.

 

[Deleted member 365]

The difference is that she's strongly opposed to regime change type interventionism.

I'm not a Gabbard supporter and I don't really know a lot about her to be honest. I just think the accusation that she's an asset of Russia or that she panders to white nationalists is uncalled for. I mean if there's evidence that she has courted white nationalists specifically, besides just sharing one of their views about isolationism, or that she is working with Russia besides just advocating for a non-interventionist foreign policy which Russia would like to see the U.S. adopt I'm all ears.

It’s not just you who’s doing this, but a lot of people are equating Clinton’s more hawkish views to every Democratic candidate. Yet, nothing could be further from the truth.

Warren:

From endless wars that strain military families to trade policies that crush our middle class, Washington’s foreign policy today serves the wealthy and well-connected at the expense of everyone else.

For too long, our economic policies have left workers with the short end of the stick. We need to strengthen labor standards – and then fight to enforce them. That’s why Elizabeth will oppose Trump’s new “NAFTA 2.0” unless he produces a better deal for America’s working families. It’s time to stop prioritizing corporate profits over American paychecks.

A strong military should act as a deterrent so that most of the time, we won’t have to use it. We must continue to be vigilant about the threat of terrorism, but it’s time to bring our troops home – and make sure they get support and benefits they’ve earned.

We should also leverage all the tools of our national power, not just our military might. That means cutting our bloated defense budget and ending the stranglehold of defense contractors on our military policy. It means reinvesting in diplomacy and standing with our allies to advance our shared interests. It means new solutions to new global challenges, from cybersecurity to the existential threat posed by climate change.

Our strength abroad is generated here at home. Policies that undermine working families in this country also erode our strength in the world. It’s time for a foreign policy that works for all Americans, not just wealthy elites.

https://elizabethwarren.com/plans#a-foreign-policy-for-all

That doesn’t sound very hawkish to me. Hell, she even advocates for cutting the defense budget. Does Tulsi do that?

Sanders:

The U.S. must lead the world in improving international cooperation in the fight against climate change, militarism, authoritarianism, and global inequality. When we are in the White House, we will:

• Implement a foreign policy which focuses on democracy, human rights, diplomacy and peace, and economic fairness.
• Allow Congress to reassert its Constitutional role in warmaking, so that no president can wage unauthorized and unconstitutional interventions overseas.
• Follow the American people, who do not want endless war. American troops have been in Afghanistan for nearly 18 years, the longest war in American history. Our troops have been in Iraq since 2003, and in Syria since 2015, and many other places. It is long past time for Congress to reassert its Constitutional authority over the use of force to responsibly end these interventions and bring our troops home.
• End U.S. support for the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen, which has created the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe.
• Rejoin the Iran nuclear agreement and talk to Iran on a range of other issues.
• Work with pro-democracy forces around the world to build societies that work for and protect all people. In the United States, Europe, and elsewhere, democracy is under threat by forces of intolerance, corruption, and authoritarianism.

pretty dovish to me.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/responsible-foreign-policy/

Biden:

Doesn’t have an issues page. But he tends to be a little more hawkish than Sanders and Warren with his (vague) rhetoric.

https://www.cfr.org/article/joe-biden

Pete:

We need to fundamentally rethink our foreign policy to help America lead and shape a better world for our future. The next president will have to restore American credibility on the world stage and establish a new and higher standard for the deployment of U.S. military force. It’s time to put an end to endless war and focus on how best to use America’s strengths to address future threats, including climate security as a key basis for diplomacy. Pete is committed to reinventing institutions of international engagement to address 21st century challenges and opportunities and to reversing the rise of authoritarianism abroad while revitalizing democratic capitalism and our democracy at home.

https://peteforamerica.com/issues/

Klobachar:
Like Biden, doesn’t have an issues page. But her history shows that she acts as you’d expect a senator from a purple state would act:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Amy_Klobuchar

So 2/3 of the top are very non-interventionist. Then 3 of the top 5 are non-interventionist while the 2 are either vague or pretty moderate. Clearly, none of these candidates are bragging about bombing the **** out of the Middle East or nuking it so it glows in the dark (like we saw from the GOP primary in 2015). And one of them advocates for slashing the defense budget, something Trump hasn’t come close to doing. So overall, I wish people would stop acting like the Democratic candidates are a bunch of hawks here. It’s just not true.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I won’t argue that. In any event I think we can agree that US foreign policy has been a mess for years now. Maybe, just maybe it’s time to step back and try something different... this interventionist approach isn’t working.

How’s it been a mess? Aside from 2000-2008, it’s been pretty solid.

Bush I ran a pretty good ship to me. He did the right thing with the Persian Gulf War; stopped and then contained Hussein. Containment was working until his son decided to invade Iraq.

Clinton was pretty solid. Although, he obviously should’ve taken the Taliban threat in Afghanistan far more seriously. Allowing the Taliban to overtake the northern alliance gave us 9/11. We did nothing to stop the Rwandan genocide; something the UN apologized for.

However, while screwing the pooch with Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden, he was containing Hussein, stopped ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, and had a deal with North Korea.

Bush II was admittedly the low point. Killed the North Korean deal, ignored signs of radical terrorism, invaded Iraq, and antagonized iran and Russia. He did avoid a potential war with Russia in defense of Georgia and I thought most of his reaction to Afghanistan was appropriate. Russia didn’t occupy or annex georgia, unlike Ukraine. So avoiding war there was a plus. The surge in Iraq worked too. His aid to Africa helped diminish the threat of AIDS. So even Bush did some good things.

Obama: Pretty solid. ISIS was allowed to grow and rested and he did nothing to stop Saudi Arabia from killing people in Yemen. His Russian policy failed. However, he strengthened relations with our allies, got Osama, kept us out of major conflicts around the world, and got the Iran deal done.

Remember, republicans dared him to attack Syria. Things didn’t escalate on our part and millions were left displaced. This created great instability in Europe. Not sure if another war would’ve prevented that.

I’ll admit, I think he should’ve acted militarily against Russia when they invaded Ukraine. This is a case where we were too dovish. I think standing up to Putin then would’ve prevented many of the issues we’re having today. So to me, this might’ve been his biggest mistake along with Yemen. I don’t blame him for the Arab spring and Syria was and still is an impossible situation.

Trump: Plenty of negative obviously. But let’s give it a bit more time to judge.

Perfect? No.
Mess? Not really. We should consider all the stuff happening around the world instead of being mindlessly cynical about our country. I think 2000-2008 was the low point. But overall America has been a stabilizing force for good around the world. Take away the Iraqi war and what MAJOR mess are we going to bring up That’s 100 percent on us and not the industrialized world/impossible situations (like North Korea or Arab spring)?

EDIT: Study early and mid 20th century politics. We’re not exactly Tsar Nicholas II or Kaiser Wilhelm making blunder after blunder. Foreign policy has never been perfect. Woodrow Wilson kept America out of WWI for most of its duration. This saved American lives but it prolonged the war, provided the opportunity for Communists to take over Russia, and his end of war resolution was a blueprint for Hitler’s annexation of Austria and the Czech. Kennedy avoided nuclear war in 1962 with the USSR but also failed miserably with Cuba. Foreign policy is always a mixed bag. But like kennedy, the overall greater good was served by not escalating to nuclear holocaust, although millions of Cubans might’ve resented his foreign policy...

 

[Jazzta]

How’s it been a mess? Aside from 2000-2008, it’s been pretty solid.

Bush I ran a pretty good ship to me. He did the right thing with the Persian Gulf War; stopped and then contained Hussein. Containment was working until his son decided to invade Iraq.

Clinton was pretty solid. Although, he obviously should’ve taken the Taliban threat in Afghanistan far more seriously. Allowing the Taliban to overtake the northern alliance gave us 9/11. We did nothing to stop the Rwandan genocide; something the UN apologized for.

However, while screwing the pooch with Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden, he was containing Hussein, stopped ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, and had a deal with North Korea.

Bush II was admittedly the low point. Killed the North Korean deal, ignored signs of radical terrorism, invaded Iraq, and antagonized iran and Russia. He did avoid a potential war with Russia in defense of Georgia and I thought most of his reaction to Afghanistan was appropriate. Russia didn’t occupy or annex georgia, unlike Ukraine. So avoiding war there was a plus. The surge in Iraq worked too. His aid to Africa helped diminish the threat of AIDS. So even Bush did some good things.

Obama: Pretty solid. ISIS was allowed to grow and rested and he did nothing to stop Saudi Arabia from killing people in Yemen. His Russian policy failed. However, he strengthened relations with our allies, got Osama, kept us out of major conflicts around the world, and got the Iran deal done.

Remember, republicans dared him to attack Syria. Things didn’t escalate on our part and millions were left displaced. This created great instability in Europe. Not sure if another war would’ve prevented that.

I’ll admit, I think he should’ve acted militarily against Russia when they invaded Ukraine. This is a case where we were too dovish. I think standing up to Putin then would’ve prevented many of the issues we’re having today. So to me, this might’ve been his biggest mistake along with Yemen. I don’t blame him for the Arab spring and Syria was and still is an impossible situation.

Trump: Plenty of negative obviously. But let’s give it a bit more time to judge.

Perfect? No.
Mess? Not really. We should consider all the stuff happening around the world instead of being mindlessly cynical about our country. I think 2000-2008 was the low point. But overall America has been a stabilizing force for good around the world. Take away the Iraqi war and what MAJOR mess are we going to bring up That’s 100 percent on us and not the industrialized world/impossible situations (like North Korea or Arab spring)?

EDIT: Study early and mid 20th century politics. We’re not exactly Tsar Nicholas II or Kaiser Wilhelm making blunder after blunder. Foreign policy has never been perfect. Woodrow Wilson kept America out of WWI for most of its duration. This saved American lives but it prolonged the war, provided the opportunity for Communists to take over Russia, and his end of war resolution was a blueprint for Hitler’s annexation of Austria and the Czech. Kennedy avoided nuclear war in 1962 with the USSR but also failed miserably with Cuba. Foreign policy is always a mixed bag. But like kennedy, the overall greater good was served by not escalating to nuclear holocaust, although millions of Cubans might’ve resented his foreign policy...

Nice assessment, if not for two big contradictions that I spotted. Attacking Russia isn’t exactly not escalating to nuclear holocaust. You loosely say that Obama should’ve done this.

And, give Trump more time? More time to protect the Saudi family, to steal more natural resources from other countries, mainly oil? How many of those interventions were constitutional, had been approved by Congress? Enough, bring the troops home, in a safely manner, back to their families.

It sounds to me that you like misery. same as when you wished us all to be victims of an economic collapse.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Nice assessment, if not for two big contradictions that I spotted. Attacking Russia isn’t exactly not escalating to nuclear holocaust. You loosely say that Obama should’ve done this.

And, give Trump more time? More time to protect the Saudi family, to steal more natural resources from other countries, mainly oil? How many of those interventions were constitutional, had been approved by Congress? Enough, bring the troops home, in a safely manner, back to their families.

It sounds to me that you like misery. same as when you wished us all to be victims of an economic collapse.

You misread (again) three things.

#1 Attacking Russia. Never did I advocate for that. I do believe we should have stood up to them by defending our ally, Ukraine. Defending Ukraine is not the same as attacking Russia.
#2 I admitted there's plenty of negative with Trump. I didn't want to assess his foreign policy overall since he's still in office. Not sure how you missed that.
#3 Never have I wished economic harm on anyone. I do wish that people receive what they've voted for. If they voted for bad policies then they deserve bad results. Example 1: I don't believe we should be bailing out farmers so we can carry on a losing trade war. If this continues then how will we ever correct bad policies? Example 2: A few years ago Alabama passed strict anti-immigrant labor laws. The result? Millions were lost in economic output because no one was there to work the fields. Produce was left rotting on the vince. Because farmers suffered economic loss and consumers paid for higher prices, these laws were repealed.

Apparently I'm now the "radical conservative" on this board who believes that some personal accountability is a good thing.

Funny how Trump has changed so many of you.

 

[Jazzta]

You misread (again) three things.

#1 Attacking Russia. Never did I advocate for that. I do believe we should have stood up to them by defending our ally, Ukraine. Defending Ukraine is not the same as attacking Russia.
#2 I admitted there's plenty of negative with Trump. I didn't want to assess his foreign policy overall since he's still in office. Not sure how you missed that.
#3 Never have I wished economic harm on anyone. I do wish that people receive what they've voted for. If they voted for bad policies then they deserve bad results. Example 1: I don't believe we should be bailing out farmers so we can carry on a losing trade war. If this continues then how will we ever correct bad policies? Example 2: A few years ago Alabama passed strict anti-immigrant labor laws. The result? Millions were lost in economic output because no one was there to work the fields. Produce was left rotting on the vince. Because farmers suffered economic loss and consumers paid for higher prices, these laws were repealed.

Apparently I'm now the "radical conservative" on this board who believes that some personal accountability is a good thing.

Funny how Trump has changed so many of you.

Trump hasn’t changed me, rest assured.

 

[babe]

except they aren’t stopping you from spouting your nonsense. They’re just refusing to listen. Something that has been practiced for a long, long time.

Don’t like being ignored? Don’t say things that will get you ignored.

You ignored my question. Why don't we on this forum have an ignore button that will screen out stuff we're not, personally and individually, interested in. It's a great idea. It will save everyone a lot of time and annoyment.

People who come around to brag about having me on ignore, like the imbecilic fake royalty that goes by what's his name.... what was it.... my memory fades..... isn't it Sir Chick-a-holic. are just indulging in a form of personal attack of extreme poor breeding.

 

[Stoked]

You ignored my question. Why don't we on this forum have an ignore button that will screen out stuff we're not, personally and individually, interested in. It's a great idea. It will save everyone a lot of time and annoyment.

People who come around to brag about having me on ignore, like the imbecilic fake royalty that goes by what's his name.... what was it.... my memory fades..... isn't it Sir Chick-a-holic. are just indulging in a form of personal attack of extreme poor breeding.

lmfao

 

[Zombie]

So we'll abandon our allies and put captured ISIS soldiers soldiers at risk, but we'd better make sure those oil fields stay safe!

 

[Jazzta]

So we'll abandon our allies and put captured ISIS soldiers soldiers at risk, but we'd better make sure those oil fields stay safe!

It’s ****ing madness, Russia and US troops will be at the brink of confrontation. Hadn’t we become energy independent Trump?

 

[One Brow]

It’s ****ing madness, Russia and US troops will be at the brink of confrontation. Hadn’t we become energy independent Trump?

I believe we are a net energy exporter, but still a net oil importer.

 

[Jazzta]

I believe we are a net energy exporter, but still a net oil importer.

Does that justify the deployment of troops in Syria, risking a direct confrontation with Russia? We losing our minds I tell you...