You think it's beneficial for a president to conduct foreign policy both economic and military when countries your dealing with think you are moments away from being removed from office?
It has been the contention of many that they don't care about what the rest of the world thinks about him. And, to hear him talk, he's handling all incredibly well with foreign leaders. He's been very strong and powerful and 'getting the job done'.
You never answered my question. Do you think it helps or hinders a president when dealing with foreign leaders if they think he is on the verge of being removed from office? The answer is painfully clear which is why you will continue to dodge the question.
Of course it hinders a president. But my official question/premise was asking why Trump thought his presidency was hobbled. Afterall, he was boasting the best first two years in the history of the presidency. So how could be boast that, and at the same time, suggest that those two years was hobbled. And more specifically to your point, Trump boasts that he has brought respect to the country through his 'diplomacy'. And his followers say that it doesn't matter what the international community thinks of him. So, to me, it is a classic case of trying to suck and blow at the same time...
It's a classic case of doing the best possible job with the situation you have. If Trump hadn't been hobbled by this Russian collusion hoax he would have accomplished even more.
I stated my preference. We simply tell Iran that we will not allow them to obtain nukes. End of story. As a matter of fact we should tell every country that. There are enough nukes on the planet we shouldn't let anyone else have them.
So, who or what gives us the right to dictate to other sovereign nations what they can or cannot do? It sounds like you believe the old dictum, "might makes right." Given that, I guess anyone stronger than you has the right to tell you what you can & cannot do. I don't subscribe to that point of view. I think there are better ways to run a nation, the world, and even our private lives.
I subscribe to the idea that the world would be a better place without nuclear weapons entirely but that cat is already out of the bag. I believe it best that no more of them are distributed around the world.
I agree totally. But the only way that goal can be achieved is thru agreements, not thru the imposition of our might against theirs.
You can't make agreements when the other side is insincere. Asking them to recognize Israel and asking that they stop funding terrorists before we start talking about reducing or lifting sanctions is not unreasonable. We would all love to see Iran as a welcome and productive member of the world community.
1. The U.S. currently has a leader who has backtracked on every major agreement this nation has committed to for the past couple of decades. He has arbitrarily pulled us out of NAFCA, the Paris Accords for fixing global warming, and the Iran DeNuclearization Agreement--plus many others. How can you accuse OTHER leaders of being insincere when our own leader has demonstrated his own insincerity repeatedly over the past two years, to the point that NO FOREIGN COUNTRY in the world today trusts us, or our word, anymore? Iran wasn't the problem here. We were. And this isn't the first time this has happened.
What is NAFCA? The Paris agreement did nothing to affect climate change. How can you have a de nuclear agreement with a country that has no nukes? Trump was elected to undo as much of Obama's work as possible. His election was a rejection of leftist policy. I am not a Trump fan but he is vastly superior to the lying democrats and globalists.
The dude doesn't get anything done because: 1) He watches hours and hours of TV every single day, twitters about it, and is off to play golf every other weekend. 2) He employs again and again people who needs to be fired. 3) Among those people was his own lawyer who got send to jail by Mueller. So it's not as if nothing turned up. He's just incompetent, and lazy. He can't even make his own business work well.
Just stupidity. We have a system set up. It should continue as we've done since 1788. (First Presidential election).
I say this, perhaps we should have one 5 or 6 year term only for president. That way they are not consumed with campaigning to get reelected about 5 minutes after taking office. Let them do the job they were hired to do. I would say that for congress as well, term limits for the house and senate would not eliminate corruption but sure as hell would put a dent in it. And we would only be subject to watching people like Maxine Waters run her ignorant mouth non stop for 4 years. However, on the flip side that would mean 4 years of AOC stupidity on a daily basis, maybe I should reconsider. At least there is hope in another year AOC will be voted out by people engaging their brain cells in NYC
I get the sentiment. And it would be a form of justice. But it's not doable. And while it was all partisan politics, it sort of goes with the territory. A better fix is to just stop believing anything a leftist says. Stop voting for them. I mean, their credibility is in the toilet, imo. And investigate and punish those who attempted to frame Trump. The elections should go on as scheduled. If he wins re election, after four years his two terms will end and we'll have a new President.
That wasn't humor, neither was it a serious proposition. It was just him whining about how unfair the world is by saying that in a "fair" world he would get 2 bonus years to even out how unfairly he was treated since he was sworn in. In any case, tweets like this should be strong indicators that more ought to ignore him more often since there is neither laughs nor serious contributions of wisdom. In other words nothing to contribute to make the world a better or lighter place.
I agree with your sentiment that there should be no more nukes anywhere in the world. But, your statement that we "will not allow them to obtain nukes" could be difficult to impossible to follow up with. How do you propose we actually do follow up with that threat? I'm curious.
