Trump Calls NATO Obsolete and Dismisses EU in German Interview

USA and Russia should both realize they need to be allies because China is a giant growing cancer. They don't invent or innovate, instead steal technology. They threaten neighbors and their own, horrible human rights record, horrible labor rights record, they pollute the planet, they have acknowledged publicly they want to be THE world leader. I'm a talking about Liu Mingfu's book The China Dream which is their strategy to accomplish this goal. If and when they become #1, based on their past behaviors, who would trust them in that role?

All of that makes NATO extremely obsolete. That money needs to be spent elsewhere and a new coop formed that includes Russia and excludes China.

 

NATO isn't effective vs. China nor was it designed to be effective against them. It does help with Russia which has already shown military aggression and is poised to continue in that direction. NATO is a good way to help prevent the Russian aggression which is also a threat.

Making a separate alliance to deal with China is fine, but doesn't negate the need for NATO. Either way, indicating to the Russians that you are against NATO isn't a strong footing to have going to the table for negotiations.

 

I don't see it as unreasonable for these countries to want to protect themselves from Russia. Why do you? If Russia were on our border we would be armed to the teeth to prevent them from encroaching. Russia has already shown that it is fine with rolling its neighbors. I don't want our troops there but I have no problem with the US selling arms to countries that want to protect themselves from Russia. None.

 

Oh, so we are supposed to limit discussion to the single point of whether Russian bombing was "precision bombing" by "smart bombs" as our media tells us as we watch an occasional glimpse we are allowed to see on TV. Well why not join me in condemning the mass murderers on both sides, the Russians, the Americans, the Saudis and the Syrians and the Iraqis, but at least it was

Well I do think that sometimes it might be better to end a war albeit brutally, rather than aid the losing side many many years and kill a lot more people. E. G. Vietnam. Most folks would rather live in a dictatorship, keep their mouths shut than suffer years and years of the horrors of warfare and a failed state. For instance what we have done in Iraq, Libya so far, and Syria where without our intervention and that of our allies Saudi, etc. Assad, who I am not a fan of, would have put brutally down the demonstrations of the folks you and I would like in a week or two or would have ended the jihadi insurgency fairly quickly but we and the Saudis etc. wanted to use it for regime change.

I have talked to Iragis, including those who used to work for us, and they never voted for our wars against Iraq or Sadam and they generally hate us for the ungodly mess that is still continuing and which changed them from a country with decent education, infrastructure etc..

 

Na na. Not letting you move goal posts.

YOU are the one who began this conversation by praising Russia for a henious war crime. I pointed that out and you moved the goal posts with the "but the 'insert opposing side' also" argument. You are trying to defend Russia here and making false equivalencies.

At the very least I have no praise for the Iraq invasion.

 

Well we will have to disagree if it is as simple to you as I praised Russia for a heinous war crime.

 

At the very least you thought of it as a positive given the context of how you stated it. You cannot deny that. In no way would I defend Iraq or Nam as a positive.

 

So are you a pacifist? Do you think it is always better to continue hopeless wars indefinitely leading to the killing, rape and displacement of many more innocents later or to end them by engaging in bombing which let us assume not of the supposed "surgical" bombing the US claims to engage in?

I think it is a blessing for the Syrian people to have the war possibly ending soon unless our special forces advisors, the Saudis, the Emirates etc. keep supplying the Al Qaeda/ jihadi forces to overthrow Assad for foreign policy objectives.

The reasons I stress the above is that the simplistic Russkies bad US good or at least the best possible narrative we are always fed leads to the useless evils wars a couple of which you agree were bad. This also leads to a lack of resources to aid our own suffering folks. Your simplicity wrt to the Russian role in Syrian and also our role seems to me to fit into this. Fortunately, and I voted for Hillary she was prevented from escalating the war in Syria even further.

 

"America is an imperialism of Satan "& but Russian are fine."
"I'm against jihadiest but I support Mulla's jihadiest all the 100k of them !"

*Quick recap to some of the statements here

 

We can have lots of factions.

Nato vs Russia
Rato vs China
Mato vs Middle East

The USA can be in all of them....

DD

 

lol what? China presently is one of fastest growing countries for innovation in the world, and would be on track to be a gigantic innovation hub in a decade. Certainly will contribute much more to the global economy than Russia can ever hope to contribute.

 

Exactly, my company would be rolling if I stole all of my competitors technology. Name some advanced technology and its guaranteed they stole it from someone.

 

Trump says NATO no longer 'obsolete'
"I said it was obsolete," Trump declared at the White House. "It's no longer obsolete."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/12/politics/donald-trump-jens-stoltenberg-nato/index.html

He's learning a lot on this job!

 

LOL. What a fool this guy. Who knew NATO was this complicated? Derp.

 

Compared to Russia, China is very innovative, I agree. However, the country still lags behind a lot of developed countries.

http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2016/article_0008.html

 

Washington outsider is getting Washington inside 'er.

 

This guy is the biggest dumb ass alive....i can't believe people still back him