Biden and the Dems are so bloodthirsty that Trump is the nominal antiwar position. I hate this fucking place
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.
not to mention he ramped up drone strikes 400% more than obama
one of the few things I'm willing to give Biden credit for - he stopped the drone strikes
same here. and I have never heard a liberal mention it
At this point basically every influental politician in US is just Holden Bloodfeast
same with Orban vs EU
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.
Gee, why doesn't he feel the same about Palestine?
-
Trump knows how to read the room, and ending the war in Ukraine is a rewarding grift. Ending the genocide in Palestine is not nearly as rewarding
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)
every Republican president for the past fifty years is ideologically to biden's left
Lets not overstate things, was a fucking monster, probably worse than Trump and Biden.
Not probably, he was
Yeah on second thought, he's def worse than both, probably worse than both combined depending on how you calculate that.
come on, don't forget the oil man
Senator Biden supported the Iraq attack 2003 and signed off on bunches of his legislation
I always wonder how instrumental W was to the invasion plan. Not to hand it to him at all, but he always seemed just not interested in being president let alone personally make the invasion a reality.
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.
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 , remember that pathetic boat thing where they all got caught immediately? Remember the Bolivian coup that Amerikkka was almost certainly involved in?
Yeah but see that's comparatively GOOD foreign policy, just a list of failures except for assassinating that guy
Biden also has had a ton of failures. Assassinating Soleimani easily could've started a war that would've killed hundreds of thousands, we really don't need to hand it to him.
He threw Rojavah to Turkey
To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, to be her ally is fatal
We need an emoji of this with Trump's hair photoshopped on with how often this happens.
A quick and dirty version
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
The DPRK meeting is a perfect embodiment of the "upside" to Trump's foreign policy: noisy, not anything a regular president would do, and ultimately did not change the status quo even slightly.
And of course the downside is getting us closer to war with Iran (twice, I believe) than we've been in decades.
Still paint me skeptical he would really do any meaningful damage.
Whatever I ain't voting for either of them.
We have a saying on Vulcan: Only Nixon can go to China, and only Trump can go to the DPRK
chapotraphouse
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.