I trust Trump about as far as I can throw him, and at the end of the day it's really the Pentagon calling the shots here not the POTUS.

But dudes clearly speaking to a public sentiment here.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 99 points 2 years ago (25 children)

Biden and the Dems are so bloodthirsty that Trump is the nominal antiwar position. I hate this fucking place

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] [S] 77 points 2 years ago (23 children)

    Trump is the nominal antiwar position

    Trump isn't anti-war, or at least I don't trust him to be actually anti-war. He's anti-this-war, but his administration did plenty of hawkish shit towards Iran and Venezuela. I'm not even confident he'll actually do anything to deescalate in Ukraine, I think it's all bluster.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    not to mention he ramped up drone strikes 400% more than obama

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    one of the few things I'm willing to give Biden credit for - he stopped the drone strikes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 29 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 children)
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago*

    Trump's actions are often just attempts to satisfy his ego through positive media and supporter reaction. The issue with Iran if you recall is that his main supporter at the time, Fox news had a mixed reaction, with Tucker Carlson being extremely critical, something obviously like hell freezing over.

    You can go and check back on the entire Carlson arc back then but here for example Fox's Tucker Carlson slammed conservatives for pushing Trump to go to war: 'About 20 minutes ago we were denouncing these very people as the deep state'

    His base didn't particularly like that idea, he was MAGA and isolationist and yet he was about to put the US into a war with a nobody-country that wasn't a threat at the time. It wasn't Bush post 9/11 even though he thought that was an easy win.

    As soon as the base consolidated into the neutral/negative camp which he didn't expect, he backed off. Right now his base is very much positive towards ending "Biden's war" so he is very likely to do it.

    But his base also doesn't like China so that will be the next target.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (10 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 79 points 2 years ago

    The problem with Trump is not that he can't read the room. On the contrary, that's part of the problem. The room is filled with transphobic, military thumping, chauvinist, xenophobic, treat gobbling bullshit.

  • source
  • [–] 72 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Gee, why doesn't he feel the same about Palestine? brow

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

    Love when every Republican president for the past fifty years is ideologically to biden's left

    edit: they're right, Bush is the only exception (and still to Biden's left on border and immigration policy)

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 58 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    every Republican president for the past fifty years is ideologically to biden's left

    Lets not overstate things, mission-accomplished was a fucking monster, probably worse than Trump and Biden.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    come on, don't forget the oil man no-oil

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 49 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    I trust Trump about as far as I can throw him... But dudes clearly speaking to a public sentiment here.

    Reiterating all this (that Trump doesn't really care, won't have total control of foreign policy, and this is mostly a play to popular sentiment), there's a lesson here in how to present ideas so that people agree with them.

    Talking about a single issue and giving a humanist position on it will beat an ideological position that necessarily (because it's your whole ideology!) invokes other issues. Trump could have given an eloquent anti-imperialist take (lmao) and it would not have played as well. But "we need to stop all this killing?" Who's going to disagree with that? It reveals all the NATO freaks as the monsters they are for playing geopolitics with people's lives. Same as if you talk about healthcare in terms of "the richest country in the world shouldn't have people choosing between medicine and rent" instead of starting with the ideological basis for that belief.

    Not to say you should never get into ideology, just that the humanist justification for positions should be at the forefront, because it keeps the discussion focused and is harder to oppose. It does help to think about how best to present these ideas; that's a lot of what politics is.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 48 points 2 years ago* (9 children)

    Trump was already president and his foreign policy was pretty bad. He threw Rojavah to Turkey and was trying hard to start a war with Iran, assassinated Soleimani, and people just forgot about that when the pandemic started. He tried to coup Venezuela for guaido, remember that pathetic boat thing where they all got caught immediately? Remember the Bolivian coup that Amerikkka was almost certainly involved in?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Yeah but see that's comparatively GOOD foreign policy, just a list of failures except for assassinating that guy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 46 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 40 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Biden and any other POTUS runs US Imperialism by the playbook. Trump will not change US Imperialism, but he does disrupt it and panics the deep state (Industrialists and the MIC), I don't think any other POTUS would've gone to the DPRK

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›