http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/21/us/pol....html?_r=0
Some interesting excerpts from the article:
For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are among the more recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
But Mr. Trump gave no ground, whether the subject was countering North Korea’s missile and nuclear threats or dealing with China in the South China Sea. The forward deployment of American troops abroad, he said, while preferable, was not necessary.“If we decide we have to defend the United States, we can always deploy” from American soil, Mr. Trump said, “and it will be a lot less expensive.”
Many military experts dispute that view, saying the best place to keep missile defenses against North Korea is in Japan and the Korean Peninsula. Maintaining such bases only in the United States can be more expensive because of the financial support provided by Asian nations.
Mr. Trump had nothing but praise for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the country’s increasingly authoritarian but democratically elected leader. “I give great credit to him for being able to turn that around,” Mr. Trump said of the coup attempt on Friday night. “Some people say that it was staged, you know that,” he said. “I don’t think so.”Asked if Mr. Erdogan was exploiting the coup attempt to purge his political enemies, Mr. Trump did not call for the Turkish leader to observe the rule of law, or Western standards of justice. “When the world sees how bad the United States is and we start talking about civil liberties, I don’t think we are a very good messenger,” he said.
Quote:“When the world sees how bad the United States is and we start talking about civil liberties, I don’t think we are a very good messenger,” he said.[/font][/color]
Trump making sense? Interesting.
It would seem that now that he has the nomination locked up, his gameplan is to try and win favor with groups that have previously panned him: establishment Republicans and independents.
Quote:Trump making sense? Interesting.
It would seem that now that he has the nomination locked up, his gameplan is to try and win favor with groups that have previously panned him: establishment Republicans and independents.
The country as a whole aligns Center-Left. It would make sense for him to start shifting his focus that direction a little bit.
Ironically, he's been a Democrat most of his adult life, which adds the question: What is he really going to do if elected? Is he really this conservative guy, or is he pandering for votes? He's already doubled back on his tax plan now saying the rich should pay more taxes and minimum wage should be higher. I don't like him at all, I think what he's been saying is dangerous, but it's interesting to see his "policies" changing.
How can you comment on his views if you haven't been paying attention.
Donald never saw a tyrant he didn't like.
Asked about Russia’s threatening activities, which have unnerved the small Baltic States that are among the more recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing if those nations have “fulfilled their obligations to us.”
“If they fulfill their obligations to us,” he added, “the answer is yes.”
Sounds good to me. No free rides on mutual agreements.
![[Image: 6Esgj6.png]](https://i.sli.mg/6Esgj6.png)
Quote:Asked about Russia’s threatening activities, which have unnerved the small Baltic States that are among the more recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing if those nations have “fulfilled their obligations to us.”
“If they fulfill their obligations to us,” he added, “the answer is yes.”
Sounds good to me. No free rides on mutual agreements.
And more unchecked Russian aggression.
Reagan would be so proud.
Quote:How can you comment on his views if you haven't been paying attention.
Is this what you ask yourself every night? Is this why you never defend trump on his garbage?
I've actually been really impressed that you don't twist yourself into the donald's nonsense the way Pirk and fbt do.
I'll give you that. You know better than to try and defend the indefensible. Kudos for that.
Quote:And more unchecked Russian aggression.
Reagan would be so proud.
There was this guy... I forget who it was...
Some dirty toothed brit that the republicans would always clamor about...
Some guy named...Neville...
But you know, trump knows best. It's OK to appease Russia. Putin and trump were on 60 minutes... So they are cool.
If the Russians attack the Baltic members of NATO, if he doesn't think they've spent enough in their own defense, he's not going to defend them.
He's practically inviting the Russians to attack the Baltic members of Nato.
This is one massive step closer to World War III.
NATO members must fulfill their obligations to NATO, and that includes the members spending the agreed upon amount in their own defense. He's right about that. But saying we might not come to a member's defense is to invite an attack. You can't check their account before you decide whether to come to their defense. We either have NATO or we don't. To act like maybe we do and maybe we don't in the face of Putin's adventurism is extremely reckless.
Quote:Asked about Russia’s threatening activities, which have unnerved the small Baltic States that are among the more recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing if those nations have “fulfilled their obligations to us.”
“If they fulfill their obligations to us,” he added, “the answer is yes.”
Sounds good to me. No free rides on mutual agreements.
That's all very well and good. But you have to work that out BEFORE the Russians attack. Trump is saying he's going to check their accounts AFTER the Russians attack. That is INVITING a Russian attack.
The correct thing to do is to say, we are going to defend our allies and fulfill our treaty obligations, period. But separate from that, we can and should go to our allies and say, if you want to be in NATO, you have to fulfill your obligations, too.
But as long as these countries are NATO members, we have to say we will defend them, period.
What Trump said was pure amateur hour, and very dangerous.
You guys all seem to be assuming that Russia just can't wait to invade Europe and start WWIII.
The only reason Russia is talking about this is because were are placing missiles in the Baltics "to deter Iran".
Quote:You guys all seem to be assuming that Russia just can't wait to invade Europe and start WWIII.
There are some NATO members that were part of the old Soviet Union, you know. The Russians, and Putin the old KGB agent, would love to put the old Soviet Union back together. Trump seems to want to let them do it. He's pretty much announced that he wouldn't defend our NATO allies if they are attacked. I can't believe a Republican would defend such a statement.
Quote:First off, I think the US should pull out of NATO. Basically we're spending a lot of money to defend countries that should be defending themselves.
To address your statement, the graph is right there. It would take all of ten seconds to check the account. There's no delay.
Finally, Russia is not going to up and attack a Baltic State just because of what Trump says. And I think the US needs to work to get better relations with Russia. It is no longer the Soviet Union.
Russia is completely unpredictable and ruled by a gangster. Donald thinks he can get the upper hand on Putin, and I'm not seeing it.
Keep Russia in check. It's what Reagan did, and would do today.
By the way, that doesn't mean make them an enemy, or cut off trade, or anything aggressive. Just keep them in check, through a powerful (and cheap) alliance.