Hey is it good diplomacy to demand the Panama Canal back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh so, it’s 4d chess when Trump send a bunch of angry messages to random allies? And it helps our position on the world stage? I’m just hoping someone can confirm that. Thanks!

Panama was the very first country in Latin America to sign on to the Belt and Road Initiative. That's not "ally" behavior. Panama can't lay out a red carpet for an adversary, worsen our economy, and then claim they are still an ally.

Trump immediately notices this stuff

Libs are still trying to figure out what gender they are.

The first posters on this thread have probably never even heard of the Belt and Road initiative. They think diplomacy is about saying nice things so other countries will like us. It's not. It's about advancing American interests.

Can you just give a straight answer? Do you think it’s presidential, or even intelligent, and good for our international relations, for Trump to yell at Panama on Twitter? And yell at Canada calling it America’s 51st state (as if we are to annex it). Offer to buy Greenland? Or to yell at BRIC countries?

What do most people do when you yell at them? I’m just really curious if you actually think it strengthens our standing when Trump does this? You really think it does anything beneficial? Yelling and making absurd, childish hissy fits? We can’t just “take back the canal” as he said. Canada is not our 51st state. Can’t you see this talk is harmful?

I haven't been equivocal. It's really strange to me that you find my position difficult to discern. I'll say it very simply: I support President Trump’s efforts to bring the dynamics of the Panama Canal back to a point where China doesn't receive an advantage over the US. Is that clear? This thread is about the substance of the issue, whether it is good diplomacy to assert our interests in the Panama Canal. Yes. Yes it is.

Specifically, you think it’s okay for him to yell at and threaten to “take back” the canal? And you find nothing wrong with that threat, even though it’s impossible and we can’t at all do that? You think that’s intelligent diplomacy?

Dear God, man. I've said yes endlessly here. Yes, yes.

Also it's not impossible to invade Panama. We have a recent history of doing so.

So rather than bring up the issue in normal bilateral trade talks, or even before considering economic sanctions, you think it’s perfectly fine to threaten to invade Panama and take back “take back” the canal. This approach has as much brains and credibility as Dimity Medvedev drunkenly threatening to nuke Europe.

This is what I find so comical. That MAGA folks are so clueless about international hard and soft power, that they can’t see that the 3 international
relations gaffes in recent weeks, where Trump basically Twitter yells at countries is what qualifies as diplomacy. Like they’re so fking stupid they think the world will quake, and ties won’t be frayed, when Trump makes outlandish nonsense claims like forcefully taking back the Panama Canal. They think it projects “strength”. Meanwhile, it’s just annoying static. You people are such absolute 5th grade level comprehension fkwits you can’t see that the emperor has no clothes. It’s beligerent bullsht.

It's called realpolitik. MAGA didn't invent it.

Also. You spend a lot of time hurling insults rather than debating substance. It surprises me that you don't find Trump more compelling since you favor his insulting communication style.

I believe in what another Republican once said: “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Not “make wild-ass threats on Twitter before you’ve consulted the State Department or DoD”. Do you see the difference?

Well, I believe in reading the situation and acting accordingly. Trump gets a lot done with a few simple tweets. Not everything needs to be a drawn out affair. Maybe Panama will remember what it was like to have their President captured and flown to the US for a prison term, and decide to make some needed changes.

What has he accomplished via tweet exactly? Please provide examples. Also, if it’s such a great technique, why don’t you apply it at work and see how much you accomplish?

Didn't he just tweet this hours ago? It's not reasonable to expect progress on an issue this complex in a few hours.

True, so give an example of other things he has accomplished with a simple tweet.

So far, all that has happened is that he has put Panama on notice. It's totally insane and unreasonable to think that he'd make Panama renegotiate their deals with China overnight on a Saturday. So we can't possibly know the impact of this yet.

“Put them on notice” that he would invade to “take the canal back” and you think that’s stable genius discourse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. The MAGAs on this board constantly told us that Trump was going to get us out of wars (ignoring of course that we’re not in any wars). But now threatening to invade another country is actually awesome.

Neither party, thank goodness, takes an absolutist position on foreign interventions as a category. The parties differ only on which ones are necessary and how much resources should be devoted to each. The GOP is skeptical of our interventions in Syria and Ukraine (and not even universally, there is widespread disagreement in the GOP regarding these conflicts). The mainstream media has declared these 2 examples to be proof of "isolationism." And the left just accepts this, despite abundant evidence otherwise.

Even this topic was presented as, is it okay to pressure other countries? Rather than issue-specific, should the US pressure Panama to change its policy toward China?

Trump has his eyes on the economy and energy markets and the Panama Canal is key to that. So even if want to try to view foreign policy in a vacuum, reality doesn't work that way. It affects our economy.

But no one on the left wants these real conversations. They want to say, "gosh all those right wingers sure are illiterate and dumb!" And then come on here with a total lack of curiosity about the issues and even our recent history of literally rolling our Marines into Panama and deposits its political leadership. Over, frankly, less than this Canal issue.

So wars are good when Trump says so. Seems different that the “Trump is the peace candidate” you guys were selling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh so, it’s 4d chess when Trump send a bunch of angry messages to random allies? And it helps our position on the world stage? I’m just hoping someone can confirm that. Thanks!

Panama was the very first country in Latin America to sign on to the Belt and Road Initiative. That's not "ally" behavior. Panama can't lay out a red carpet for an adversary, worsen our economy, and then claim they are still an ally.

Trump immediately notices this stuff

Libs are still trying to figure out what gender they are.

The first posters on this thread have probably never even heard of the Belt and Road initiative. They think diplomacy is about saying nice things so other countries will like us. It's not. It's about advancing American interests.

Can you just give a straight answer? Do you think it’s presidential, or even intelligent, and good for our international relations, for Trump to yell at Panama on Twitter? And yell at Canada calling it America’s 51st state (as if we are to annex it). Offer to buy Greenland? Or to yell at BRIC countries?

What do most people do when you yell at them? I’m just really curious if you actually think it strengthens our standing when Trump does this? You really think it does anything beneficial? Yelling and making absurd, childish hissy fits? We can’t just “take back the canal” as he said. Canada is not our 51st state. Can’t you see this talk is harmful?

I haven't been equivocal. It's really strange to me that you find my position difficult to discern. I'll say it very simply: I support President Trump’s efforts to bring the dynamics of the Panama Canal back to a point where China doesn't receive an advantage over the US. Is that clear? This thread is about the substance of the issue, whether it is good diplomacy to assert our interests in the Panama Canal. Yes. Yes it is.

Specifically, you think it’s okay for him to yell at and threaten to “take back” the canal? And you find nothing wrong with that threat, even though it’s impossible and we can’t at all do that? You think that’s intelligent diplomacy?

Dear God, man. I've said yes endlessly here. Yes, yes.

Also it's not impossible to invade Panama. We have a recent history of doing so.

So rather than bring up the issue in normal bilateral trade talks, or even before considering economic sanctions, you think it’s perfectly fine to threaten to invade Panama and take back “take back” the canal. This approach has as much brains and credibility as Dimity Medvedev drunkenly threatening to nuke Europe.

This is what I find so comical. That MAGA folks are so clueless about international hard and soft power, that they can’t see that the 3 international
relations gaffes in recent weeks, where Trump basically Twitter yells at countries is what qualifies as diplomacy. Like they’re so fking stupid they think the world will quake, and ties won’t be frayed, when Trump makes outlandish nonsense claims like forcefully taking back the Panama Canal. They think it projects “strength”. Meanwhile, it’s just annoying static. You people are such absolute 5th grade level comprehension fkwits you can’t see that the emperor has no clothes. It’s beligerent bullsht.

It's called realpolitik. MAGA didn't invent it.

Also. You spend a lot of time hurling insults rather than debating substance. It surprises me that you don't find Trump more compelling since you favor his insulting communication style.

I believe in what another Republican once said: “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Not “make wild-ass threats on Twitter before you’ve consulted the State Department or DoD”. Do you see the difference?

Well, I believe in reading the situation and acting accordingly. Trump gets a lot done with a few simple tweets. Not everything needs to be a drawn out affair. Maybe Panama will remember what it was like to have their President captured and flown to the US for a prison term, and decide to make some needed changes.

What has he accomplished via tweet exactly? Please provide examples. Also, if it’s such a great technique, why don’t you apply it at work and see how much you accomplish?

Didn't he just tweet this hours ago? It's not reasonable to expect progress on an issue this complex in a few hours.

True, so give an example of other things he has accomplished with a simple tweet.

So far, all that has happened is that he has put Panama on notice. It's totally insane and unreasonable to think that he'd make Panama renegotiate their deals with China overnight on a Saturday. So we can't possibly know the impact of this yet.

“Put them on notice” that he would invade to “take the canal back” and you think that’s stable genius discourse?

Can you cite where he threatened invasion? I haven't seen that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. The MAGAs on this board constantly told us that Trump was going to get us out of wars (ignoring of course that we’re not in any wars). But now threatening to invade another country is actually awesome.

Neither party, thank goodness, takes an absolutist position on foreign interventions as a category. The parties differ only on which ones are necessary and how much resources should be devoted to each. The GOP is skeptical of our interventions in Syria and Ukraine (and not even universally, there is widespread disagreement in the GOP regarding these conflicts). The mainstream media has declared these 2 examples to be proof of "isolationism." And the left just accepts this, despite abundant evidence otherwise.

Even this topic was presented as, is it okay to pressure other countries? Rather than issue-specific, should the US pressure Panama to change its policy toward China?

Trump has his eyes on the economy and energy markets and the Panama Canal is key to that. So even if want to try to view foreign policy in a vacuum, reality doesn't work that way. It affects our economy.

But no one on the left wants these real conversations. They want to say, "gosh all those right wingers sure are illiterate and dumb!" And then come on here with a total lack of curiosity about the issues and even our recent history of literally rolling our Marines into Panama and deposits its political leadership. Over, frankly, less than this Canal issue.

So wars are good when Trump says so. Seems different that the “Trump is the peace candidate” you guys were selling.

Like I said in the pp you're responding to, there's quite a bit of controversy in the GOP about Syria and Ukraine. So no, I would not agree to your characterization.

[Anonymous]

Trump is still pissed he got sued for tax evasion in Panama 5 years ago and lost management control of a Trump Hotel that got converted into a Marriott.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh so, it’s 4d chess when Trump send a bunch of angry messages to random allies? And it helps our position on the world stage? I’m just hoping someone can confirm that. Thanks!

Panama was the very first country in Latin America to sign on to the Belt and Road Initiative. That's not "ally" behavior. Panama can't lay out a red carpet for an adversary, worsen our economy, and then claim they are still an ally.

Trump immediately notices this stuff

Libs are still trying to figure out what gender they are.

The first posters on this thread have probably never even heard of the Belt and Road initiative. They think diplomacy is about saying nice things so other countries will like us. It's not. It's about advancing American interests.

Can you just give a straight answer? Do you think it’s presidential, or even intelligent, and good for our international relations, for Trump to yell at Panama on Twitter? And yell at Canada calling it America’s 51st state (as if we are to annex it). Offer to buy Greenland? Or to yell at BRIC countries?

What do most people do when you yell at them? I’m just really curious if you actually think it strengthens our standing when Trump does this? You really think it does anything beneficial? Yelling and making absurd, childish hissy fits? We can’t just “take back the canal” as he said. Canada is not our 51st state. Can’t you see this talk is harmful?

I haven't been equivocal. It's really strange to me that you find my position difficult to discern. I'll say it very simply: I support President Trump’s efforts to bring the dynamics of the Panama Canal back to a point where China doesn't receive an advantage over the US. Is that clear? This thread is about the substance of the issue, whether it is good diplomacy to assert our interests in the Panama Canal. Yes. Yes it is.

Specifically, you think it’s okay for him to yell at and threaten to “take back” the canal? And you find nothing wrong with that threat, even though it’s impossible and we can’t at all do that? You think that’s intelligent diplomacy?

Dear God, man. I've said yes endlessly here. Yes, yes.

Also it's not impossible to invade Panama. We have a recent history of doing so.

So rather than bring up the issue in normal bilateral trade talks, or even before considering economic sanctions, you think it’s perfectly fine to threaten to invade Panama and take back “take back” the canal. This approach has as much brains and credibility as Dimity Medvedev drunkenly threatening to nuke Europe.

This is what I find so comical. That MAGA folks are so clueless about international hard and soft power, that they can’t see that the 3 international
relations gaffes in recent weeks, where Trump basically Twitter yells at countries is what qualifies as diplomacy. Like they’re so fking stupid they think the world will quake, and ties won’t be frayed, when Trump makes outlandish nonsense claims like forcefully taking back the Panama Canal. They think it projects “strength”. Meanwhile, it’s just annoying static. You people are such absolute 5th grade level comprehension fkwits you can’t see that the emperor has no clothes. It’s beligerent bullsht.

It's called realpolitik. MAGA didn't invent it.

Also. You spend a lot of time hurling insults rather than debating substance. It surprises me that you don't find Trump more compelling since you favor his insulting communication style.

I believe in what another Republican once said: “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Not “make wild-ass threats on Twitter before you’ve consulted the State Department or DoD”. Do you see the difference?

Well, I believe in reading the situation and acting accordingly. Trump gets a lot done with a few simple tweets. Not everything needs to be a drawn out affair. Maybe Panama will remember what it was like to have their President captured and flown to the US for a prison term, and decide to make some needed changes.

What has he accomplished via tweet exactly? Please provide examples. Also, if it’s such a great technique, why don’t you apply it at work and see how much you accomplish?

Didn't he just tweet this hours ago? It's not reasonable to expect progress on an issue this complex in a few hours.

True, so give an example of other things he has accomplished with a simple tweet.

So far, all that has happened is that he has put Panama on notice. It's totally insane and unreasonable to think that he'd make Panama renegotiate their deals with China overnight on a Saturday. So we can't possibly know the impact of this yet.

“Put them on notice” that he would invade to “take the canal back” and you think that’s stable genius discourse?

Can you cite where he threatened invasion? I haven't seen that.

He demanded it be returned to us “without question” if the demands in his a little Twitter tirade aren’t met.

You do the math.

He is so fking unpresidential and embarrassing and you folks think this is projecting “strength”. It’s projecting idiocy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is still pissed he got sued for tax evasion in Panama 5 years ago and lost management control of a Trump Hotel that got converted into a Marriott.

Yup.

[Anonymous]

M’eh, better the US seizes it now instead of China seizing it later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh so, it’s 4d chess when Trump send a bunch of angry messages to random allies? And it helps our position on the world stage? I’m just hoping someone can confirm that. Thanks!

Panama was the very first country in Latin America to sign on to the Belt and Road Initiative. That's not "ally" behavior. Panama can't lay out a red carpet for an adversary, worsen our economy, and then claim they are still an ally.

Trump immediately notices this stuff

Libs are still trying to figure out what gender they are.

The first posters on this thread have probably never even heard of the Belt and Road initiative. They think diplomacy is about saying nice things so other countries will like us. It's not. It's about advancing American interests.

Can you just give a straight answer? Do you think it’s presidential, or even intelligent, and good for our international relations, for Trump to yell at Panama on Twitter? And yell at Canada calling it America’s 51st state (as if we are to annex it). Offer to buy Greenland? Or to yell at BRIC countries?

What do most people do when you yell at them? I’m just really curious if you actually think it strengthens our standing when Trump does this? You really think it does anything beneficial? Yelling and making absurd, childish hissy fits? We can’t just “take back the canal” as he said. Canada is not our 51st state. Can’t you see this talk is harmful?

I haven't been equivocal. It's really strange to me that you find my position difficult to discern. I'll say it very simply: I support President Trump’s efforts to bring the dynamics of the Panama Canal back to a point where China doesn't receive an advantage over the US. Is that clear? This thread is about the substance of the issue, whether it is good diplomacy to assert our interests in the Panama Canal. Yes. Yes it is.

Specifically, you think it’s okay for him to yell at and threaten to “take back” the canal? And you find nothing wrong with that threat, even though it’s impossible and we can’t at all do that? You think that’s intelligent diplomacy?

Dear God, man. I've said yes endlessly here. Yes, yes.

Also it's not impossible to invade Panama. We have a recent history of doing so.

So rather than bring up the issue in normal bilateral trade talks, or even before considering economic sanctions, you think it’s perfectly fine to threaten to invade Panama and take back “take back” the canal. This approach has as much brains and credibility as Dimity Medvedev drunkenly threatening to nuke Europe.

This is what I find so comical. That MAGA folks are so clueless about international hard and soft power, that they can’t see that the 3 international
relations gaffes in recent weeks, where Trump basically Twitter yells at countries is what qualifies as diplomacy. Like they’re so fking stupid they think the world will quake, and ties won’t be frayed, when Trump makes outlandish nonsense claims like forcefully taking back the Panama Canal. They think it projects “strength”. Meanwhile, it’s just annoying static. You people are such absolute 5th grade level comprehension fkwits you can’t see that the emperor has no clothes. It’s beligerent bullsht.

It's called realpolitik. MAGA didn't invent it.

Also. You spend a lot of time hurling insults rather than debating substance. It surprises me that you don't find Trump more compelling since you favor his insulting communication style.

I believe in what another Republican once said: “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Not “make wild-ass threats on Twitter before you’ve consulted the State Department or DoD”. Do you see the difference?

Well, I believe in reading the situation and acting accordingly. Trump gets a lot done with a few simple tweets. Not everything needs to be a drawn out affair. Maybe Panama will remember what it was like to have their President captured and flown to the US for a prison term, and decide to make some needed changes.

What has he accomplished via tweet exactly? Please provide examples. Also, if it’s such a great technique, why don’t you apply it at work and see how much you accomplish?

Didn't he just tweet this hours ago? It's not reasonable to expect progress on an issue this complex in a few hours.

True, so give an example of other things he has accomplished with a simple tweet.

So far, all that has happened is that he has put Panama on notice. It's totally insane and unreasonable to think that he'd make Panama renegotiate their deals with China overnight on a Saturday. So we can't possibly know the impact of this yet.

“Put them on notice” that he would invade to “take the canal back” and you think that’s stable genius discourse?

Can you cite where he threatened invasion? I haven't seen that.

He demanded it be returned to us “without question” if the demands in his a little Twitter tirade aren’t met.

You do the math.

He is so fking unpresidential and embarrassing and you folks think this is projecting “strength”. It’s projecting idiocy.

No, he made an if/then statement. Here is the direct quote:

"If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question."

So, IF Panama does not start following the treaty, THEN the US will demand the return of the Panama Canal. Note, the *return.* It was ours and we gave it to them under a legally binding agreement, which they have violated. This seems quite reasonable and measured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is still pissed he got sued for tax evasion in Panama 5 years ago and lost management control of a Trump Hotel that got converted into a Marriott.

Yup.

As an aside, the Trump Ocean Club in Panama City was built primarily as a money laundering vehicle for Russians and drug traffickers. Apartments were bought but never occupied. The Trump Org. continued to get money from the project while Trump was president the first time.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/panama-tower-carries-trump-s-name-ties-organized-crime-n821706

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh so, it’s 4d chess when Trump send a bunch of angry messages to random allies? And it helps our position on the world stage? I’m just hoping someone can confirm that. Thanks!

Panama was the very first country in Latin America to sign on to the Belt and Road Initiative. That's not "ally" behavior. Panama can't lay out a red carpet for an adversary, worsen our economy, and then claim they are still an ally.

Trump immediately notices this stuff

Libs are still trying to figure out what gender they are.

The first posters on this thread have probably never even heard of the Belt and Road initiative. They think diplomacy is about saying nice things so other countries will like us. It's not. It's about advancing American interests.

Can you just give a straight answer? Do you think it’s presidential, or even intelligent, and good for our international relations, for Trump to yell at Panama on Twitter? And yell at Canada calling it America’s 51st state (as if we are to annex it). Offer to buy Greenland? Or to yell at BRIC countries?

What do most people do when you yell at them? I’m just really curious if you actually think it strengthens our standing when Trump does this? You really think it does anything beneficial? Yelling and making absurd, childish hissy fits? We can’t just “take back the canal” as he said. Canada is not our 51st state. Can’t you see this talk is harmful?

I haven't been equivocal. It's really strange to me that you find my position difficult to discern. I'll say it very simply: I support President Trump’s efforts to bring the dynamics of the Panama Canal back to a point where China doesn't receive an advantage over the US. Is that clear? This thread is about the substance of the issue, whether it is good diplomacy to assert our interests in the Panama Canal. Yes. Yes it is.

Specifically, you think it’s okay for him to yell at and threaten to “take back” the canal? And you find nothing wrong with that threat, even though it’s impossible and we can’t at all do that? You think that’s intelligent diplomacy?

Dear God, man. I've said yes endlessly here. Yes, yes.

Also it's not impossible to invade Panama. We have a recent history of doing so.

So rather than bring up the issue in normal bilateral trade talks, or even before considering economic sanctions, you think it’s perfectly fine to threaten to invade Panama and take back “take back” the canal. This approach has as much brains and credibility as Dimity Medvedev drunkenly threatening to nuke Europe.

This is what I find so comical. That MAGA folks are so clueless about international hard and soft power, that they can’t see that the 3 international
relations gaffes in recent weeks, where Trump basically Twitter yells at countries is what qualifies as diplomacy. Like they’re so fking stupid they think the world will quake, and ties won’t be frayed, when Trump makes outlandish nonsense claims like forcefully taking back the Panama Canal. They think it projects “strength”. Meanwhile, it’s just annoying static. You people are such absolute 5th grade level comprehension fkwits you can’t see that the emperor has no clothes. It’s beligerent bullsht.

It's called realpolitik. MAGA didn't invent it.

Also. You spend a lot of time hurling insults rather than debating substance. It surprises me that you don't find Trump more compelling since you favor his insulting communication style.

I believe in what another Republican once said: “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Not “make wild-ass threats on Twitter before you’ve consulted the State Department or DoD”. Do you see the difference?

Well, I believe in reading the situation and acting accordingly. Trump gets a lot done with a few simple tweets. Not everything needs to be a drawn out affair. Maybe Panama will remember what it was like to have their President captured and flown to the US for a prison term, and decide to make some needed changes.

What has he accomplished via tweet exactly? Please provide examples. Also, if it’s such a great technique, why don’t you apply it at work and see how much you accomplish?

Didn't he just tweet this hours ago? It's not reasonable to expect progress on an issue this complex in a few hours.

True, so give an example of other things he has accomplished with a simple tweet.

So far, all that has happened is that he has put Panama on notice. It's totally insane and unreasonable to think that he'd make Panama renegotiate their deals with China overnight on a Saturday. So we can't possibly know the impact of this yet.

“Put them on notice” that he would invade to “take the canal back” and you think that’s stable genius discourse?

Can you cite where he threatened invasion? I haven't seen that.

He demanded it be returned to us “without question” if the demands in his a little Twitter tirade aren’t met.

You do the math.

He is so fking unpresidential and embarrassing and you folks think this is projecting “strength”. It’s projecting idiocy.

No, he made an if/then statement. Here is the direct quote:

"If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question."

So, IF Panama does not start following the treaty, THEN the US will demand the return of the Panama Canal. Note, the *return.* It was ours and we gave it to them under a legally binding agreement, which they have violated. This seems quite reasonable and measured.

You are reaching so hard to justify his angry Twitter “diplomacy”. It really is a cult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh so, it’s 4d chess when Trump send a bunch of angry messages to random allies? And it helps our position on the world stage? I’m just hoping someone can confirm that. Thanks!

Panama was the very first country in Latin America to sign on to the Belt and Road Initiative. That's not "ally" behavior. Panama can't lay out a red carpet for an adversary, worsen our economy, and then claim they are still an ally.

Trump immediately notices this stuff

Libs are still trying to figure out what gender they are.

The first posters on this thread have probably never even heard of the Belt and Road initiative. They think diplomacy is about saying nice things so other countries will like us. It's not. It's about advancing American interests.

Can you just give a straight answer? Do you think it’s presidential, or even intelligent, and good for our international relations, for Trump to yell at Panama on Twitter? And yell at Canada calling it America’s 51st state (as if we are to annex it). Offer to buy Greenland? Or to yell at BRIC countries?

What do most people do when you yell at them? I’m just really curious if you actually think it strengthens our standing when Trump does this? You really think it does anything beneficial? Yelling and making absurd, childish hissy fits? We can’t just “take back the canal” as he said. Canada is not our 51st state. Can’t you see this talk is harmful?

I haven't been equivocal. It's really strange to me that you find my position difficult to discern. I'll say it very simply: I support President Trump’s efforts to bring the dynamics of the Panama Canal back to a point where China doesn't receive an advantage over the US. Is that clear? This thread is about the substance of the issue, whether it is good diplomacy to assert our interests in the Panama Canal. Yes. Yes it is.

Specifically, you think it’s okay for him to yell at and threaten to “take back” the canal? And you find nothing wrong with that threat, even though it’s impossible and we can’t at all do that? You think that’s intelligent diplomacy?

Dear God, man. I've said yes endlessly here. Yes, yes.

Also it's not impossible to invade Panama. We have a recent history of doing so.

So rather than bring up the issue in normal bilateral trade talks, or even before considering economic sanctions, you think it’s perfectly fine to threaten to invade Panama and take back “take back” the canal. This approach has as much brains and credibility as Dimity Medvedev drunkenly threatening to nuke Europe.

This is what I find so comical. That MAGA folks are so clueless about international hard and soft power, that they can’t see that the 3 international
relations gaffes in recent weeks, where Trump basically Twitter yells at countries is what qualifies as diplomacy. Like they’re so fking stupid they think the world will quake, and ties won’t be frayed, when Trump makes outlandish nonsense claims like forcefully taking back the Panama Canal. They think it projects “strength”. Meanwhile, it’s just annoying static. You people are such absolute 5th grade level comprehension fkwits you can’t see that the emperor has no clothes. It’s beligerent bullsht.

It's called realpolitik. MAGA didn't invent it.

Also. You spend a lot of time hurling insults rather than debating substance. It surprises me that you don't find Trump more compelling since you favor his insulting communication style.

I believe in what another Republican once said: “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Not “make wild-ass threats on Twitter before you’ve consulted the State Department or DoD”. Do you see the difference?

Well, I believe in reading the situation and acting accordingly. Trump gets a lot done with a few simple tweets. Not everything needs to be a drawn out affair. Maybe Panama will remember what it was like to have their President captured and flown to the US for a prison term, and decide to make some needed changes.

What has he accomplished via tweet exactly? Please provide examples. Also, if it’s such a great technique, why don’t you apply it at work and see how much you accomplish?

Didn't he just tweet this hours ago? It's not reasonable to expect progress on an issue this complex in a few hours.

True, so give an example of other things he has accomplished with a simple tweet.

So far, all that has happened is that he has put Panama on notice. It's totally insane and unreasonable to think that he'd make Panama renegotiate their deals with China overnight on a Saturday. So we can't possibly know the impact of this yet.

“Put them on notice” that he would invade to “take the canal back” and you think that’s stable genius discourse?

Can you cite where he threatened invasion? I haven't seen that.

He demanded it be returned to us “without question” if the demands in his a little Twitter tirade aren’t met.

You do the math.

He is so fking unpresidential and embarrassing and you folks think this is projecting “strength”. It’s projecting idiocy.

No, he made an if/then statement. Here is the direct quote:

"If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question."

So, IF Panama does not start following the treaty, THEN the US will demand the return of the Panama Canal. Note, the *return.* It was ours and we gave it to them under a legally binding agreement, which they have violated. This seems quite reasonable and measured.

You are reaching so hard to justify his angry Twitter “diplomacy”. It really is a cult.

What about his statement seems like yelling or angry to you? He didn't even use all caps. He explained the US's position. This is what presidents do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dum dum libs hate America being smart. They thought Joe was “sharp”

Biden is leaving very soon. You won't be able to blame Biden on Trump's failures. It will be all his.
Embrace it, MAGA!

People don't really talk about Biden. Its been all Trump, all the time, everywhere since 2016. So thanks for threatening the status quo?

[Anonymous]

I actually think we should completely prevent Panama from allowing our adversaries (China) to benefit in any way from the canal aside from trade with the US through the canal. No foreign controlled ports etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dum dum libs hate America being smart. They thought Joe was “sharp”

Biden is leaving very soon. You won't be able to blame Biden on Trump's failures. It will be all his.
Embrace it, MAGA!

People don't really talk about Biden. Its been all Trump, all the time, everywhere since 2016. So thanks for threatening the status quo?

I didn't think about Trump while Biden was in office! Everything I said was true, not a threat.