• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Could Trump put an end to America's failed policy of war?

Will Wiley

Will Wiley

Veteran Member
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
1,692
Location
Mincogan
Basic Beliefs
naturalist
Firstly I'll say that I believe the President that puts an end to America's endless failed wars will be regarded by history as a great leader. Sadly no politician from either of the major parties has come close. Even Obama whilst good in some areas has been a failure.
Donald Trump has been the only candidate (maybe ever but certainly for a long time to show any signs of changing this. Yes, of course he lies and will say anything, so I look forward to the usual disgruntled people to point this out, but could it happen?
 
Last edited:
Will Wiley said:
Firstly I'll say that I believe the President that puts an end to America's endless failed wars will be regarded by history as a great leader. Sadly no politician from either of the major parties has come close. Even Obama whilst good in some areas has been a failure.
Donald Trump has been the only candidate (maybe ever but certainly for a long time to show any signs of changing this. Yes, of course he lies and will say anything, so I look forward to the usual disgruntled people to point this out, but could it happen?
Click to expand...

Obviously he will. The recession hit in 2008 and it was just recently the American economy recovered. The economy is cyclical. It's bound to be super boom times now. Which Trump can cash in on.

Just remember how popular Bill Clinton is. He literally did fuck all to deserve the economic boom during his presidency. He still gets the credit. BTW, the people who deserve credit for that boom wasn't a politician at all. It was the tech/computer industry. The economic growth in US economy now isn't due to Obama. It's mostly due to the work of Nick Steinsberger. This will continue. Never heard of him? Shame on you.
 
Last edited:
Joe Stalin was so well regarded that when Prokofiev died on the same day, Pravda didn't even mention the great composer's death until several weeks later, as their column inches were reserved exclusively for reports of the tragic death of the great leader.

Trump might gain similar levels of adoration in his life. But history will not be kind to him - unless he does something completely and radically out of character. The guy's a fucking fascist demagogue. If we are lucky, history will record that he was ineffectual. If it doesn't, then he will almost certainly become the latest member of the reviled arsehole leaders club.

Of course, if he decides that nuclear weapons might as well be used, there may be no historians to record his deeds at all.
 
bilby said:
Joe Stalin was so well regarded that when Prokofiev died on the same day, Pravda didn't even mention the great composer's death until several weeks later, as their column inches were reserved exclusively for reports of the tragic death of the great leader.

Trump might gain similar levels of adoration in his life. But history will not be kind to him - unless he does something completely and radically out of character. The guy's a fucking fascist demagogue. If we are lucky, history will record that he was ineffectual. If it doesn't, then he will almost certainly become the latest member of the reviled arsehole leaders club.

Of course, if he decides that nuclear weapons might as well be used, there may be no historians to record his deeds at all.
Click to expand...

The American president is one of the world's least empowered political leaders. I'm pretty sure each of his idiotic ideas will get curb stomped. So he'll be able to say that he tried but failed to put anything into effect. The only thing I can see happening is that gay marriage equality might get torn up. But that's perhaps unconstitutional? If so, that's fucked as well.

He can veto stuff. But that's just putting off the inevitable a couple of years.

And doing nothing isn't all bad. Often, doing nothing, is just what the economy needs. A little stability to let it work itself out.

When it comes to international diplomacy... there's precedence. Nobody can do a worse job of it than Bush. It's like he went out of his way to piss off the entire world. While a disaster. The world still managed somehow. The shops still open in the morning and bad guys are put in jail.

I'm sure it'll be fine.

I think the worst thing about this is the climate change situation. But Obama didn't do much about that either.
 
Could Trump be the president who puts an end to America's failed wars? That is the question.
 
DBT said:
Didn't he say He'd dismantle Obamacare? That may not go down well with those that benefit from universal health care.
Click to expand...
Obamacare is an issue for citizens of the USA. The wars are an issue for many innocent people who are not US citizens.
(I edited the topic as I wanted to discuss the wars and its easy to get off that topic)
 
DBT said:
Didn't he say He'd dismantle Obamacare? That may not go down well with those that benefit from universal health care.
Click to expand...

The Republicans control congress, so that'll be real easy for him to do. I suspect this is the only thing Trump will really be able to pull off, of all his promises.
 
Will Wiley said:
Could Trump be the president who puts an end to America's failed wars? That is the question.
Click to expand...

FWIW, yes it is possible. However, as he is obviously a consummate liar who the fuck knows. I think it is most likely he will do whatever he thinks will give him heady mix of the best of accolades from who he thinks follows him, and what he thinks will help him go down in history as important. He could make a deal with Russia regarding Syria and dial our involvement back (pissing off Turkey and SA); or he may turn the Syrian effort red hot; or he could start a war with Iran...but who the fuck knows.

I think the below pic gives one a good idea about what Trump's priorities are:
gallery-1462816039-donald-trump-1.jpg
 
Doubtful. The Republicans are opposed to the Iran nuclear deal; I'd be more surprised if there weren't more wars. The Republicans also, for the most part, deny the existence of climate change while the Democrats acknowledge it's existence and want to do something about it. That's not just a USA issue.

Ending wars, may or may not be good, it depends on who, how, and why.
 
What are his only firm policy statements?

1. Allies should do more for their own defense, rather than relying on the USA (I actually agree with this)
2. We should work with Russia and Assad to defeat Isis (I am cautious about this)
3. We should scrap our nuclear deal with Iran (I am against this)
4. Align with the Israeli right wing in their relations with the Palestinians (I am against this)
5. Build a wall on the Mexican border and make them pay for it (I am against this)
6. Ban or severely restrict entry of Muslims into the United States (I am against this)

Frankly, I don't see much that is anti-war here. The scrapping of our nuclear deal with Iran and close alliance with Israel's right wing is actually a very clear threat for war in the Middle East. A war with Iran would be more costly than Iraq and Afganistan put together.

His shift towards Israel's opinions came gradually during the campaign, and frankly I hope he at least reneges on the Iran promise. He initially said that he'd work within the context of the agreement, in his capacity as a deal maker. If he actually does that instead of what he later promised, he might be a less warlike president. But as long as he echoes the policies of the Republican and Likud parties, war in the middle east is inevitable, as that is what both parties want. We can hope that he correctly sees that he owes his disaffected worker base (who is largely anti-war) more than he owes the establishment in Washington and Jerusalem. The best outcome possible is that he sticks with the body of the Iran deal, maybe winning some token concessions, and appeasing Israel's right by moving the embassy to Jerusalem and ignoring the settlements.
 
This just in: Haaretz is reporting that a document has been distributed to Israeli embassies saying that Trump thinks the Middle East "Isn't a good investment."

If this is so (and believing it requires believing both Haaretz and the Israeli Foreign Ministry, (eta and also Trump himself)) It may be a positive development on the peace front.

Frankly, if we are going to have a lousy president, (and we are), it's probably better that he be an isolationist.
 
Last edited:
Sarpedon said:
Frankly, if we are going to have a lousy president, (and we are), it's probably better that he be an isolationist.
Click to expand...

I would hope so. America created this problem, so it would be best that the consequences of this problem be borne more by Americans than by anyone else.

With Bush, you got the worst of both worlds - an incompetent idiot in the Presidency and having that incompetent idiot want to extend his policies globally instead of just domestically. He crashed the US economy and he fucked up the planet with US belligerence. If Trump can be limited to the former, it's one less thing that the next President will need to spend his term cleaning up.
 
Will Wiley said:
Could Trump be the president who puts an end to America's failed wars? That is the question.
Click to expand...
Why one earth would anyone think that Trump will end US wars (failed or otherwise). He has openly said we should torture terrorists and enemy combatants and kill their families as well, and that we need to build up our military again.
 
If you go by his own words, Trump is going ramp up the "war on terror" not end it. He wants to "bomb the shit out of" Isis. He wants to build up the military. He thinks our military is too weak right now.

On what is this fantasy based on that Trump would be less militaristic?
 
Will Wiley said:
Could Trump be the president who puts an end to America's failed wars? That is the question.
Click to expand...

The question is not clear. Do you mean Trump will not start a war that fails ? The USA is not at war with anybody right now are they ?
 
TSwizzle said:
Will Wiley said:
Could Trump be the president who puts an end to America's failed wars? That is the question.
Click to expand...

The question is not clear. Do you mean Trump will not start a war that fails ? The USA is not at war with anybody right now are they ?
Click to expand...
Of course not, the US hasn't declared war since 1941...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom