![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
luvdovz.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsExhibit 1. It's time to start taking Donald Trump's scary foreign policy views seriously
"But while Trump may lack an ideology, he definitely has policy views on key issues such as Russia, China, and ISIS. Some are nationalist, some economic nationalist, some more dovish, and some defy categorization. Many of these ideas track with what he's said about foreign policy for years. Put together, they're an eclectic plan to take US policy and put it on a totally new course — often in some fairly radical, and fairly scary, ways."
Exhibit 2. Donald Trump's Foreign Policy Plan Would Give Putin Exactly What He Wants
You're getting my drift, I suppose. Trump = dangerous. Re: Europe, while he's somehow making Mexico pay for that beautiful big wall (which, as it turns out, would neither be beautiful, nor would it be cheap, nor is it going to be paid for by the Mexicans, but anyway, don't let fact and reason get in the way of a nice demagogic narrative), Trump apparently plans to exit NATO and disengage from Europe. Or something. Because this worked oh-so-well before WW1, didn't it? Oh wait...
Re: his hypothetical eye-to-eye interaction with tovarysch Putin that he doesn't stop blabbering about, the KGB man is definitely going to dominate The Donald in any face-to-face dealings they may have. A shadowy KGB career plus a reputation as a back-dealing bully in a very rigorous political system... vs a TV celeb self-proclaimed "success guru" (who really isn't that). You may've guessed which the safest bet is, and who's going to be empty-handed in those dealings. On the upside though, in the worst-case scenario with a Trump presidency, he might be safest disengaging from Europe and leaving the field to the big-league players. Shall we say good riddance?
Ps. In the meantime, The Donald has already started shaping his foreign-policy team of advisors. And the news ain't pretty. From corrupt cronyists, to guerrilla trainers, to all sorts of losers in the field. Surprised, anyone? Guess not.
"But while Trump may lack an ideology, he definitely has policy views on key issues such as Russia, China, and ISIS. Some are nationalist, some economic nationalist, some more dovish, and some defy categorization. Many of these ideas track with what he's said about foreign policy for years. Put together, they're an eclectic plan to take US policy and put it on a totally new course — often in some fairly radical, and fairly scary, ways."
Exhibit 2. Donald Trump's Foreign Policy Plan Would Give Putin Exactly What He Wants
You're getting my drift, I suppose. Trump = dangerous. Re: Europe, while he's somehow making Mexico pay for that beautiful big wall (which, as it turns out, would neither be beautiful, nor would it be cheap, nor is it going to be paid for by the Mexicans, but anyway, don't let fact and reason get in the way of a nice demagogic narrative), Trump apparently plans to exit NATO and disengage from Europe. Or something. Because this worked oh-so-well before WW1, didn't it? Oh wait...
Re: his hypothetical eye-to-eye interaction with tovarysch Putin that he doesn't stop blabbering about, the KGB man is definitely going to dominate The Donald in any face-to-face dealings they may have. A shadowy KGB career plus a reputation as a back-dealing bully in a very rigorous political system... vs a TV celeb self-proclaimed "success guru" (who really isn't that). You may've guessed which the safest bet is, and who's going to be empty-handed in those dealings. On the upside though, in the worst-case scenario with a Trump presidency, he might be safest disengaging from Europe and leaving the field to the big-league players. Shall we say good riddance?
Ps. In the meantime, The Donald has already started shaping his foreign-policy team of advisors. And the news ain't pretty. From corrupt cronyists, to guerrilla trainers, to all sorts of losers in the field. Surprised, anyone? Guess not.
(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 19:28 (UTC)Geopolotics is about international trade
Date: 23/3/16 19:42 (UTC)Putin has a plan to replace production of US corporations by native Russian production, the plan is called "importozameschenie" that means - replacing import goods with domestic. Will US corporations support Trump as perspective Putin's ally?
(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 20:10 (UTC)And geopolitics is only partially about trade. There's also the striving for control of resources.
(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 23:30 (UTC)Contradiction in his relation to Putin
Date: 23/3/16 19:34 (UTC)RE: Contradiction in his relation to Putin
Date: 23/3/16 20:16 (UTC)There's no contradiction. Take some pressure off Russia, and you give them more leeway to "increase influence and meddling".
RE: Contradiction in his relation to Putin
Date: 23/3/16 21:33 (UTC)RE: Contradiction in his relation to Putin
Date: 25/3/16 03:34 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 25/3/16 06:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 20:28 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 19:35 (UTC)Guerrilla trainers - that could actually be useful - but Jeff Sessions. and the other names who have been behind foreign policy decisions for the last 20 years - kind of disappointing. So much for winning so much we get tired of winning.
(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 20:17 (UTC)Lessons are there only to be put in some history books and never be learned, obviously.
(no subject)
Date: 23/3/16 20:31 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 24/3/16 00:28 (UTC)I'm not entirely clear what real purpose the US Army serves in Europe now other than maintaining that global logistical network. Empire has a self-sustaining inertia all its own, but just because that can be so doesn't mean it should be so. Trump is a disaster, but at this point he's essentially buggered the GOP political sphere beyond recognition so he may essentially be laying the groundwork for a total implosion in the next few months. Hopefully Hillary can ride it out with fair ease.