Here’s the weird thing, I agree with Trump’s actions against China and with your analysis that Xi is a major player in our faltering negotiations with NK. China is out of economic weapons in our very hot trade war but they are not limited to tariffs as retaliation. They can make the South China Sea very hot and active, costing us a great deal of money. Along with frustrating NK I would look for things to get pretty choppy around the flowing of trade across the Pacific.
I did not make that mistake. Trump took over the ISIS operations from Obama as they were concluding. He opted to pull all IS interests out of Syria, handing over the entire country to Putin.
I think history books will clearly note that Obama gave Syria to Iran (and Russia) as part of his negotiations in the Iran nuclear deal. But you be the judge. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/syria-crisis-obama-foreign-policy-disaster/
Yeah, they might get pretty choppy. Either way, China can decide it is time to play with the same rules as everyone else at any time. It is tough to change decades of economic misbehavior in a single showdown. You guys should be proud Trump is standing up for US and world economic interests.
Haha, you guys have nothing better to do with your lives? His was a long post and I agreed with most of it.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/07/muscles_in_brussels_how_president_trump_exposes_the_europeans_doublecrossing_game.html
What exactly is the European double crossing here? The fact that they don't spend way too much money on 'defense' (read corporate welfare) is somehow a bad thing? What is this nonsense about countries HAVE to spend x% on 'defense'? Who is forcing US to spend 4% on 'defense' ?What a bunch of nonsense.
@Altavest_Erik You jumped in, what was your takeaway from the article you posted? FYI, you have at least one dead video link on your website. You would not want people thinking you were slapdash would you.