Helsinki--the Tipping Point?

[Dill]

(07-17-2018, 03:27 PM)Benton Wrote: At this point, it largely doesn't matter. There's a decent chance of midterm mashup (growing more in the left's favor every time Trump curtsey's to a foreign power). And, for the GOP, that's probably largely ok. They've got their tax breaks through, pork shoveled out, shown lobbyists they can still get the job done and gotten some very pro-business seats locked down on the SCOTUS. It's probably in their best interest to take a back seat and let Dems get some seats so that when the economic train derails (and it's going to soon judging by the writing on the wall), they can blame it on the Dems and that unstable Trump agenda, which wasn't theirs. 

Losing a relationship with the President isn't a big deal with what they've gotten done, especially if the Dems come in and he starts having to make deals to get things like his wall done. If anything, that helps them when it comes time to push a traditional RHINO.

Concisely expressed and persuasive.  

(07-17-2018, 03:27 PM)Benton Wrote: His base has been largely easily manipulated. As long as that continues, the grass-roots blind eye, I don't think it matters. 

Those kinds of relationships are — in my limited experience — beyond the scope of the president. Take the Obama years, and the link below.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/12/us/politics/isis-centcom-intelligence.html

There are powers-that-be that need an end which may be completely different than what an administration wants. And they're going to make sure that end comes to pass. In that case, it was altering intel reports regarding the effectiveness against ISIS. If Trump wants to flip a switch and tell NATO to figure out its own problems, there's going to be pushback from intelligence and military communities that have worked for decades to develop allies and communication.

Not always. We pretty much have FDR (plus a world war) to thank for the UN, World Bank, IMF, NATO etc., even if Truman had to see all that through. You are right that these complex foreign policy relations are "beyond" any one president, if by that you mean to directly control. But it is not beyond any one president to maintain existing alliances, and it is not beyond any one to sabotage them. I think this president may effect a massive re-arrangement, and there will be little our own intel community and DOD, or comparable "in-house" forces, can do about it. (I made this argument earlier this year regarding the Far East as well.)

I say that because Trump is forcing allies to step back and re-consider their national interest. The problem goes beyond Trump, since there is a significant segment of the American voting public who embraced his bad judgment as good sense. They cannot be voted out of office and will remain long after Trump. Our allies understand this. The impetus for change will come largely from the EU itself, and will be hard to stop once put in motion. Countries have to figure out how to insure economic and military security. That imperative drives them to consider alternatives, to create, and sometimes go with, a plan B or a plan C.