Trump's unclouded foreig policy is quite radical. He will use the US power to extort tribute from close allies as a trade-in for protection. Countries who don't pay will get no protection. This applies to all allies without discrimination. Pesumably, he plans for a golden age for US citizens by charging allies for protection. He pursues an alliance with Russia against China. He acknowledges Russia's capabilities and power and he is willing to listen to Russian geostrategical desires, if it doesn't cost the US too much (Crimea is a "done deal"). Probably also, because Putin is a leader with whom he will actually be able to "strike deals".
I think he wants to keep China in check with Russia's help. I haven't heard much from him about this, so I don't know what he's up to.
Regional conflicts would go unchecked if intervention doesn't provide revenue. That adds a lot of fuel to hot and incite cold conflicts.
All in all, a not very nice picture. Especially for the countries that benefit from traditional US foreign policy (especially the Western World but numerous other small allies).
First question, reasonable: Tell me Sup Forums how much power does the US president really have? That means: How much of this outline can possibly put into practice without enciting too much opposition?
Second question, fantasizing: And are there ways imaginable, how he could expand his power, depriving e.g. congress of power, to get this foreign policy on the way without being shackled by such cumbersome institutions?
>charging allies for protection Have you ever thought that america protects these allies because it's in its best interest?And stop sucking Putin's dick.He's Erdogan tier.
Grayson Cooper
Please note: This is not my opinion. I am summarizing Trump's positions. If you could read, you would have noticed.
Trump is sucking Putin's dick not me.
Connor Cooper
wtf Sup Forums
Are you really unable to have an actual discussion about policy?
Logan Price
>pol >actual discussion Kek
Brody King
>mexico >close allies as in, we pretty much own mexico? sure but allies don't send drugs into your country they don't send illegals rapists
Adam Powell
These NATO countries are LEGALLY BOUND to pay 2% GDP per year on their OWN DEFENSE.
THEY HAVEN'T BEEN.
Christopher Miller
>He will use the US power to extort tribute from close allies as a trade-in for protection No Hans, NATO requires every member-state to spend at least 2% of their annual GDP to fund NATO. The only members to do so are the US, the UK, Estonia, Poland, and Greece. The rest spend less than 2%. You for example only spend 1.18% of your GDP. The US is not expected to pay for other countries protection in any way, shape or form, as each state should be capable of defending themselves.
Pay up or fuck off, faggot.
Jack Powell
>WHAT?? WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO OUR PART, EXTORTION!!!!
Jeremiah Allen
Fair point. We pay for our own protection.
That is not what I am talking about. I am talking about Trump's idea that the US should stop protecting countries where the US cannot expect revenue. Trump never talks about American ideals and values outside of the US. Up to now, the US always had an agenda of acitvely promoting freedom and democracy. Trump doesn't seem to care about that. He thinks in purely economic terms.
I think his foreign policy would lead to a very different Western World, where the exertion of power will to be used much more openly and commonly to achieve US goals. In the mean time, Trump's view is that Russia has legitimate interests in Europe. He is not bound be the traditional stance that the US is Europe's protector but would always consider deals with Russia, if the US would benefit or if US interests are not compromised.
So, a completely different world, much more dog eat dog and very likely much more instable.
My question's I have already posted.
Maybe an additionl question: Do you want this world?
Charles Long
Countries who contribute to their own defense would surely have more military autonomy then just sitting there and letting America plonk a load of bases on their land. I don't see how Countries paying for a fair amount towards their protection would result in it being easier for America to achieve their goals. It you own the bombs you get to decide where they're dropped.
The US agenda of actively promoting freedom and democracy has only shat up places worse. I can't think of anytime US intervention has actually worked out.
Evan Gomez
America already holds too much power and doesn't have the right to intervene in most conflicts. They should fugg off especially arming terrorists.
Isaiah Parker
> more military autonomy
Exactly. And they will use it. That is what I am pointing out. It will lead to many more conflicts, since the US will losen its geopolitical grip in regional conflicts.
> interventions
I am not only talking about active military intervention. Surely there have been a number of cock-ups but Europe always could rely on US protection in its entirety. That would change.
Is this desirable, especially in the long term?
Isaiah Hill
>promoting freedom and democracy That's an odd way of saying supporting their own interests. Is Saudi Arabia a bastion of freedom and democracy? Are the "moderate rebels" in Syria freedom fighters? Is Libya a democracy?
Cameron Jones
Yeah we've relied on America. And they have always been happy to war profiteer and turn europe into a collection if puppet states. Do we really need or want their help?
Levi Gomez
It does hold a fuckton of power. But we (that is Western World) profit.
If the US would voluntarily withdraw its influence in regions where it doesn't see benefits the void will be filled by other powers. I don't know how this will play out but it will have profound influences on the current world oder.
Maybe the question is, whether the US still is capable of maintaining her power or whether she has already peaked and her power is in decline. In this case Trump would only accelerate what is inevitable.
Ryan Sullivan
Of course they pursue their interest. But up to now we could rely on actually having a US government that to some extent recognised it's allies needs. We are puppet states to some extent. We have been since WW2 and since the EU is divided I see no way this will change. But I'd take the US over Russia as my protector any time.
Michael Jackson
Stop deluding yourself that Trump is Machiavellian or even remotely pragmatic. He just says shit he thinks people want to hear and will get him elected. He has no geopolitical compass nor a remote understanding of power politics because he is an illiterate moron.
>Last interview he didn't even know that Russia was already in Ukraine and annexed Crimea
Tyler Cook
Kind of like the EU then.
Jose Cruz
>its now considered extortion to not pay for the defence of european countries.
Zachary Russell
I think it is dangerous to underestimate Trump. He might not be the most educated in international affairs but his layout of a Trump foreign policy has been very consistent.
I think it would be in the best interest of the Eastern block to be able to independently hold its own defensively.
When it comes to conflicts like Ukraine I feel like Americas hands are tied. If they got involved in a military capacity, it could have turned into a global shit show. If the Eastern block had more independence they would be able to better act in defend there own best interests while at the same time having America in the back seat to prevent actually being steamrolled.
Also I think if America was about to lose access to it's only warm water port you best believe they be spreading some democracy all over a region.
Sebastian Barnes
It was bad wording, but the point stands.
See:
Lincoln Morris
No, not at all. The EU is divided and Putin is destabilizing the Union. Plus: The EU has economic but not military power. Compared to the US the EU is a military dwarf and the global financial system is dominated by the US.
Jack Gray
I dont really see how this is in any way different than what has been happening before.
Prior to Putins first more bolder moves, germans were quite happy to sell the eastern euros for gas money to russia, while pretending that if any issues were to arise from this sellout, its americas problem to handle.
I think if americans retract their blank statement of "protect muh europe", it will lead to more intelligent decisions within europe itself as well, since there will once again be a cost that the locals must pay for stupid political games, not just america.
Landon Smith
I am very much in favor of the Eastern block being more independent. Thing is, Trump admires Putin and he seeks an alliance. Do you think they will stay independent?
Dominic Howard
Fuck off memeland. Who the fuck do you need protection from anyway? Nobody fucking wants you, you're too small. Stop your baltic circlejerk and fucking admit that you're not relevant.
Xavier Morgan
So you would welcome a world with less US influence even if Russia may want a bigger piece of the cake?
Please explain the German's eastern euros for gas and its implications. How does that work?
Jordan Martinez
What makes you think we need a protector? Are we third world dictatorships which have to pick a side or have freedom delivered? European powers founded the modern world and are still world powers. Well I'm not so sure about Germany, you have to get rid of the foreign occupation and have a military again but you're still the world's fourth largest economy. Meaning you can afford to defend yourselves. Or pay america to do it, boosting their economy and being their puppet.
Carson Cook
>extort tribute
fuck you - pay up Germany. Even Greece pays their fair share. Quit sucking snadnigger dick and PAY THE FUCK UP !! faggot.
Carson Wright
> not relevant
If I were a irrelevant small country sitting next to a giant that wants to expand i would be quite concerned with Trump's foreign policy.
How do you feel about the Trump/Putin duo?
Jason Martinez
Problem is, america will lose its influence inevitably anyway. World is about to abandon the petrodollar, and with it soon will crash the americans ability to produce infinite debt.
American influence in the world is declining, but difference between trump and hillary is that Trump will reduce the empires stretching slowly, by forcing euros to pick up their own slack, while Hillary will pretend that nothing is wrong, and will do so until they crash and burn completely.
American power in the world is waning. To prepare us for it is a blessing, not an "extortion"
Lincoln Ramirez
Again, bad wording by me, but see:
Carter Gutierrez
Also: >Please explain the German's eastern euros for gas and its implications. How does that work?
I will only comment on the first question. It is a fuckload of power. Its going to be real interesting to see how quick everyone pays up.
I want to see what he does regarding us in NORAD, the yanks have been letting us off the hook financially thanks to the NORAD treaties for a long time. Would be surprised if they came under scrutiny but people like to forget why Canada puts so little into our forces.
Our current expenditure needs to come up to meet our NATO targets as is.
Camden Morris
I think if the removal of blanket protection from Europe is done in a slow responsible manner it could be achieved & with great success.
Daniel James
Can anyone give an answer to my questions from the initial post?
I'd like to know how likely it is that Trump's policy will come into effect when he is president.
Also, how much watered down will his foreign policy get?
