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.

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.

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?

Anonymous wrote:LOL. The idea came from Laura Loomer…

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, no one is talking about “pressure other countries” which is clearly some misplaced uphemism in this case. Trump straight up threated our alley Panama by threatening to take the Panama Canal back by force. Last week he trolled Trudeau calling him governor and calling Canada the 51st state. Then he was screaming at BRICS countries telling them what they can and can’t do and that’s start their own currency.

Normal people on here can see that type of behavior is enormously harmful. Petty threats. You’re so up Trumps rear end you seem to believe the way he speaks to other nations with his little internet tweets is somehow akin to wise diplomacy. It’s telling. Do you think other countries are going to sit here in perpetuity accepting that kind of sht talk? You think it’s helpful?

Yes, I think it's helpful and will produce good results. You seem to need a lot of confirmation of this. Yes, a thousand times yes, Trump is very effective with foreign policy.

He’s really not. But hey half of America reads at a 5th grade level, so not surprised by this response.

Your enthusiasm for literacy is touching, but no one here reads at a fifth grade level. Focus on the issue.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:36 trillion in debt. We finally have a businessman

Who has gone bankrupt many times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, no one is talking about “pressure other countries” which is clearly some misplaced uphemism in this case. Trump straight up threated our alley Panama by threatening to take the Panama Canal back by force. Last week he trolled Trudeau calling him governor and calling Canada the 51st state. Then he was screaming at BRICS countries telling them what they can and can’t do and that’s start their own currency.

Normal people on here can see that type of behavior is enormously harmful. Petty threats. You’re so up Trumps rear end you seem to believe the way he speaks to other nations with his little internet tweets is somehow akin to wise diplomacy. It’s telling. Do you think other countries are going to sit here in perpetuity accepting that kind of sht talk? You think it’s helpful?

Yes, I think it's helpful and will produce good results. You seem to need a lot of confirmation of this. Yes, a thousand times yes, Trump is very effective with foreign policy.

He’s really not. But hey half of America reads at a 5th grade level, so not surprised by this response.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, no one is talking about “pressure other countries” which is clearly some misplaced uphemism in this case. Trump straight up threated our alley Panama by threatening to take the Panama Canal back by force. Last week he trolled Trudeau calling him governor and calling Canada the 51st state. Then he was screaming at BRICS countries telling them what they can and can’t do and that’s start their own currency.

Normal people on here can see that type of behavior is enormously harmful. Petty threats. You’re so up Trumps rear end you seem to believe the way he speaks to other nations with his little internet tweets is somehow akin to wise diplomacy. It’s telling. Do you think other countries are going to sit here in perpetuity accepting that kind of sht talk? You think it’s helpful?

Yes, I think it's helpful and will produce good results. You seem to need a lot of confirmation of this. Yes, a thousand times yes, Trump is very effective with foreign policy.

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.

Yeah, no one is talking about “pressure other countries” which is clearly some misplaced uphemism in this case. Trump straight up threated our alley Panama by threatening to take the Panama Canal back by force. Last week he trolled Trudeau calling him governor and calling Canada the 51st state. Then he was screaming at BRICS countries telling them what they can and can’t do and that’s start their own currency.

Normal people on here can see that type of behavior is enormously harmful. Petty threats. You’re so up Trumps rear end you seem to believe the way he speaks to other nations with his little internet tweets is somehow akin to wise diplomacy. It’s telling. Do you think other countries are going to sit here in perpetuity accepting that kind of sht talk? You think it’s helpful?

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.

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.