Has Trump – Who Ran On an Anti-War Platform – Already Sold Out to the Warmongers … Or Is He Just Playing Unpredictable Madman to Gain Negotiating Leverage?

Conservative Patrick Buchanan – who endorsed Trump for president – writes:

High among the reasons that many supported Trump was his understanding that George W. Bush blundered horribly in launching an unprovoked and unnecessary war on Iraq.

***

Unlike the other candidates, Trump seemed to recognize this.

Trump’s anti-war, anti-interventionist statements appealed to many Americans.  Indeed, quite a few Sanders supporters switched to Trump (or stayed home on election day) because of Trump’s anti-war promises … and Clinton’s record as a warmonger.

Buchanan expresses disappointment that Trump is already saber-rattling:

It was thought he would disengage us from these wars, not rattle a saber at an Iran that is three times the size of Iraq and has as its primary weapons supplier and partner Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Former long-time Congressman Ron Paul notes that Trump has already engaged in bombings in Yemen:

Andrew Spannaus notes:

The early Trump administration has sent mixed signals regarding relations with Russia. Trump’s initial comments indicated that the U.S. would seek a diplomatic deal to reduce tensions around Ukraine, including by potentially recognizing the pro-Russian referendum in Crimea, in exchange for a broader deal with Russia involving cooperation against terrorism or nuclear arms reduction. However, Trump’s United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley on Thursday vowed to continue sanctions against Russia until it surrendered Crimea.


Brandon Turbeville says, “The new boss is now starting to look extremely similar to the old boss.”  Turbeville also points out that Trump appears to be mucking about in Syria.

And since Trump took the helm, war with China is looking increasingly likely.

So it’s starting to look like – despite his promises of being an anti-war non-interventionist – Trump will be a warmonger.

I hope I’m wrong … and that Trump is just playing the unpredictable madman to gain negotiating leverage with foreign powers.

Conservative Michael Rivero notes:

I too am alarmed by Trump’s rhetoric.

But there are two factors to consider.

The first is that Trump is still trying to win Senate confirmation for his nominees, and Trump and the Nominees may be saying what they know the Warmongers in the Senate (like McCain and Graham) want to hear. What Trump does after the confirmations will be telling.

Second, if you read Trump’s book, “The Art of the Deal”, he writes that the opening bid in any negotiation should be very aggressive, far beyond reasonable, then let the counterparty negotiate back to what you actually wanted in the first place. That tactic served him well in business and he may well be using it here with Russia, China, and Iran.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • NOS

    When the only foreign leader that Trump relates to is the Israeli war criminal,
    how can you expect him not to be a warmonger.

    BTW, Israhell dictates Trump’s Middle East foreign policy and he’s the gentle to be used to implement the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”?

    Buchanan is a politician and shouldn’t have fell into the Trump’s anti-war empty rhetoric trap.

    • Charlie Primero

      A vote for Hillary was a vote for GUARANTEED continuation of the NeoCon wars for Wall Street and Israel.

      You haven’t noticed the hordes of Dual Citizen warmongers screeching and kvetching about Trump’s less aggressive overall foreign policy stance?

      • diogenes

        Yes, Hillary’s war-mongering rhetoric was more scary than Trump’s and had all the hired whores of the oligarchy behind it. Trump is still an open question, for all his fright-mask. Hillary is a closed book and, here’s hoping, has been permanently shelved.

  • Southern Style

    The Middle East is little more than the “tar baby” of US Foreign Policy, should Trump choose to pursue interest in this area, rest assured, that such involvement WILL NOT be in the best interest of America.

  • That can’t be true because the left is dying or is already dead according to some of the work posted around here.

    All those Sanders voters and the reason/s for their rejection of HC must be a figment of our collective imaginations.

    • paul

      Sanders who was into the war thing….

      • diogenes

        Yes. Unfortunately. Which is also telling. Even the “left” of the Democratic Party is terminally compromised and has been since Bryan’s second loss (1900). Will Americans ever get a clue? Not if the hired liars of mass media and mass education can help it.

    • cityspeak

      I would argue that some of the work on the Washington Blog is talking about the death of the Neoliberal Clinton/Obama Democrats is dead.
      The actions of the democratic party since the Clintons cannot be considered left or progressive minus a few civil rights gains for a few minorities.

      • I’m referring primarily to the “work” of PCR, who makes no such distinctions. Anyone with half a political brain and integrity to match would never label Clintonians or Obama’s most enamored supporters as “lefties”. The ideological center line no longer resides where it use to or should. We lefties have been their critics and in some cases like my own since BC’s first admin.

        • diogenes

          Charactering discussion on Washingtonsblog by the writings of PCR is at least as bogus as it would be to cite, say, Mr. Smith. Most discussion here seems to trend toward the view cityspeak presents: the official Democratic Party fakeout “left” has been exposed for the toxic hoax it has always been. Anyone who can’t see this in view of the deep-policy continuity — domestic and foreign — that runs from Bill Clinton through Bush II and Obama is not paying attention or is refusing to face facts or is terminally dullwitted or is committed to an agenda of deceit.

          • BS. Who did such “charactering”? Not me. I made the simple and narrow case that some allege there is virtually no antiwar, etc, left left, the dem leadership notwithstanding. I need a lesson from you on “continuity” as a critic of the BC admin while living through it like I need to read another PCR turd.

  • LeseMajeste

    This is the same ship that got the ‘October Surprise’ in 2000 from a Popeye cruise missile launched from an Israeli sub, but blamed on al CIA Duh, but it cinched the election for Bush the Deranged.

    Washington (AFP) – The US Navy has sent a destroyer to waters off Yemen in response to an attack by Iran-backed Houthi rebels on a Saudi frigate, a defense official said Friday.

    The USS Cole, which had been conducting operations in the Gulf, is now stationed in the Bab al-Mandab Strait off southwestern Yemen, the official said.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-navy-sends-destroyer-yemen-172340268.html

  • michaelrivero

    I too am alarmed by Trump’s rhetoric.

    But there are two factors to consider.

    The first is that Trump is still trying to win Senate confirmation for his nominees, and Trump and the Nominees may be saying what they know the Warmongers in the Senate (like McCain and Graham) want to hear. What Trump does after the confirmations will be telling.

    Second, if you read Trump’s book, “The Art of the Deal”, he writes that the opening bid in any negotiation should be very aggressive, far beyond reasonable, then let the counterparty negotiate back to what you actually wanted in the first place. That tactic served him well in business and he may well be using it here with Russia, China, and Iran.

    • LeseMajeste

      Getting both sides together in a room and cutting a deal, a deal that has money or trade as it’s outcome, it’s OK to get extreme, but when B-2’s, nuclear tipped cruise missiles, and most of all, support for Israel is involved, then the Art of the Deal is too damn dangerous.

      Trump is Obama in white face, but most won’t see that until it’s too late. Let’s see, Trump had some women and children murdered in Yemen, but that’s dealing! He’s had the USAF drop bombs on Syria, but that’s being shrewd! He’s letting Ukraine kill civilians in the Donbass, but he’s just using that for a bargaining chip, that deal maker!
      Now he’s making threats to Iran, the fav target of delusional war mongers like McCain and Lindsey, but hey, that’s the ‘Art of the Deal,’ and if you don’t like it, TS.

    • diogenes

      Trump’s nominees are billionaires and ex-generals and doctrinaire wackos. This is not encouraging.

  • Re: Has Trump – Who Ran On an Anti-War Platform – Already Sold Out to the Warmongers … Or Is He Just Playing Unpredictable Madman to Gain Negotiating Leverage?

    The EoP NTE GMA: Ecology of Peace Near Term Extinction Green Morning America POTUS submission [PDF] offer made to Donald Trump, not only provided him with the opportunity to prove he was a sincere peace anti-war candidate; but gave him the best leverage ever: honourable buck stops here leverage.

    Trump has so far declined it. Don’t know for how much longer the offer shall be on the table, for his response.

  • Gary Youree

    His stance on stupid wars and refusal to fall in with the anti-Russian rhetoric was his only redeeming quality – even if he did not realize it.
    What I really like with this site is that, follow the links enough, it always returns to the same truth; rouge state empire, etc.
    What is all boils down to, imo, is a psychopathic corporate elite vs humanity. Capitalism has become a global corporate criminal enterprise – one in which psychopaths thrive by going straight to the quickest path to profits; the sale of munitions and weapons of mass destruction – the ultimate reason for most wars but mired in the confusion and misdirection of ideologies, religious dogma, and vengeance. We are being made culpable in our own demise. This core reason needs to be brought to the forefront. We need an empathy party in this country.

    • diogenes

      “Capitalism” has ALWAYS been “a global corporate criminal enterprise” and the Wall Street oligarchy that operates it on behalf of the 16 thousand familiies (among 325 million of us) who own — by frauds and crimes dating back to the Civil War — a controlling interest in America — usurped, subverted and took control of American government and both fake parties by 1900 and has been tightening their grip around the throats of Americans and the world ever since. Until we admit, confront and address this basic fact, we’re all just blowing smoke.

      • freewheelinfranklin543

        Capitalism,Communism,Socialism,Fascism are all bankster isms,controlled opposition.
        Listen to diogenes,cynic that he be,because he just shone the light of truth on you and me.

  • Jim G

    Perhaps Trump is not entirely in control of the military or US policy towards Russia, Iran, or China, but thought he would be. As I remember Obama did not seem to be entirely in control of his military either. Perhaps there are laws that the administration has to follow, or policies we are committed to through diplomatic exchanges. Sure Trump would like to team up with Russia on Syria and the Middle East, so the CIA and “WW III” McCain pitches war in the Ukraine blame it on Russia cause we are right. Pressure on Iran and China might be based in Trump’s mind, Iran and Hezbollah for Israel and China for trade, energy, and banking. Although Trump is responsible for increased tensions with Iran and China, I see other spoons in the pot. But the other spoons are extra – Constitutional, aren’t they? Is the President the Commander and Chief of the Military and the CIA, per the Constitution or not? Who are McCain and the CIA responsible to, any way?

    • I have profited 104000 bucks in 2016 by doing an online job and I manage to earn that much by w­orking part time f­o­r 3 or sometimes more h every day. I was following an earning model I came across online and I am happy that i made so much money on the side. It’s really user-friendly a­n­d I’m so grateful that i found it. Here is what i did… http://statictab.com/8cx4rgs

    • I have made $104,000 previous year by working from my house and I did it by work­ing part time f­­o­­r 3 or sometimes more hours /daily. I’m using an earning model I came across from company that i found online and I am so excited that i was able to make so much extra income. It’s really beginner friendly a­­n­­d I’m just so grateful that I found out about it. Here is what i do… http://statictab.com/dk8k8gt

  • The 2 things I look for most in a candidate is what they are saying about the U.S. wars and about the bankers. Pat Buchanan is correct, Trump did seem to ‘get it’ when it came to the Middle East, etc., yet he is already showing a different stripe. Very sad.

  • lunaursus76

    My humble take on all this is that Trump is building his hand of cards right now, and what we will see as in cards, getting this, and tossing out that. He’s not doing a whole lot of tossing at the moment, he’s sizing up what he has in his hand first and watching how the game is being played, who is making moves and what cards they are rejecting. He’s already tossed out the jokers (calling jokers non usable cards in this game), ex….the ones who refused to play/cooperate in various departments, and some minor traitors. He is holding his cards close. Nobody can peek and cheat. He has promised to share his winnings with us, so all we can do is sit and watch…but also watch his back for him.

    I have the feeling that in the very near future his cabinet will not run him as cabinets have done other presidents. Nor will we see a Vice President running roughshod over a President as we saw with Cheney/Bush…nor will we see a VP saying the opposite things that his President has just said, as we did with Obama/Biden. No, this will not be business as usual President, I don’t believe he wants wars but he has promised to end terrorism, which means he has to cut off all means of funding to them and even fight them. It is evident he does not want the US to turn into Europe, with hoards of radical muslims overrunning the citizenry, harming them, thus his choice to detain some from certain countries for processing and some, from coming in. Since I gage the globalist leaders as those who allowed unchecked entry of hoards of radicals into their countries, (ex: Merkel of Germany) it told me which ones were nwo globalists, including our own at the time, Obama. Now, I see something different…I see a president against allowing radicals in unchecked which tells me he is not a globalist. Not a player of that game, because he wants to go by Federal Immigration Laws.