Decency, Trump and Obama.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-06-2017, 08:10 PM)Dill Wrote: After WWII, the US helped set up a system of treaties (NATO, SEATO etc.) and economic measures (World Bank, IMF) designed to prevent the world from ever falling back into the cataclysm of a world war.  And so far that has worked, turning our former enemies into staunch allies.


The economies of many countries depend upon these treaties and measures for stability.  To say that they would no longer be depending upon us doesn't sound good for either them or the US. 

Bring military considerations into the discussion, a goofy leader becomes more troubling, for the US as well as those other countries.  Many committed Trumpsters love to hear Trump talk tough about existing or potential US enemies. But a large part of US power post WWII has come from its ability to gain consent and cooperation from many countries.  E.g. Bush 41 put together a coalition of 31 states to push Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in 1991. Obama got most of the world to buy in to Iran sanctions, and then a treaty to reduce their nuclear threat signed by France, Russia, China and Great Britain. The US brokered peace between Pakistan and India during the Kargil war in '99, insisting that Pakistan remove the Nukes it was positioning in Kashmir, likely averting a nuclear conflagration. That would have been bad for the world, including the US, not just Pakistan and India.

China is right now a surgent power, both economically and military, and challenging the US in the Pacific Rim. Would this be a good time to create a vacuum to enable their expansion?  And with a nuclear-capable North Korea on that rim, which also has a goofy leader? 

In my never going to happen scenario, we don't need the consent and cooperation of other countries militarily because we aren't going to be doing anything militarily.  We have a defensive military, and what goes on between other countries is between them.  Let someone else deal with China and N Korea if they so choose.