buffalo Loc: Texas

Our liberal, mainstream media outlets would have you believe the rest of the world looks unfavorably on President Donald Trump. The news shows small protests of people in varying countries and touts it as how the global population looks towards Trump. The problem with this is its not true. In reality, the United States president is always going to have protests, regardless of who the president is or what their policies are. President Obama had protests when he traveled internationally, but the media was too busy worshiping the man to report and showcase these protests. So how does the rest of the world view Donald Trump? That really is where it becomes interesting.

Most other countries wants to avoid major military conflict. Despite this, the major problem areas involve small nations with little to no value to neighboring countries. North Korea is the prime example of this. The country continues to test nuclear weapons while leaving the national population malnourished and under privileged. For the most part (especially under the Obama administration), China and the Soviet Union backed North Korea, which made setting up extreme sanctions extremely difficult, if not impossible. Now, however, President Trump has been able to bring the international community together, including Russia and China to sign onto these sanctions until North Korea gives up its nuclear weapons (and stops making threats).

With his ability to work miracles like this in varying regions of the world, some of the international community is now comparing President Trump to one of the country’s greatest and most important past presidents. Who is he being compared to? Check out the video to find out!

http://youtu.be/G0FiVl3GThE

http://patrioticv***lnews.com/articles/how-the-international-community-really-sees-president-trump/

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

To assess the rest of the worlds view of Trump, one must ask the people who live in the rest of the world, and you have not done that - you're assessing someone else's opinion of someone else's opinion.

The rest of the world views Trump as a lose cannon, an unreliable partner - and as big a risk to world peace as N. Korea. You are correct that Trump's actions prompted the international community to agree to the new UN Sanctions, but incorrect in assigning credit to Trump as though he negotiated the "deal" - he had zero to do with it, and Halley only a small part. The Un security council agreed to the sanctions, in an effort to curb Trump's war mongering, for all the good it did them......as the sanctions had not even had time to be out into place before Trump's threats began anew. Un played Trump like a finely tuned fiddle.

I get my assessment from international newsfeeds and documentaries, available through the internet. I suggest you give this a try and leave the partisan/ideological websites alone. Those make you look foolish.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Well, now it seems lil kim has backed down. So, your wrong about Trump's rhetoric...Your just flat out moonbatty wrong about Trump. He knows exactly what he is doing whether you approve or not.

http://conservativetribune.com/north-korea-played-hand/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=patriottribune&utm_campaign=weeklypm&utm_content=libertyalliance

http://www.wsj.com/articles/north-korea-backs-off-guam-missile-attack-threat-1502751054

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

How the International Community Really Sees President Trump (From an international newsfeed)

Donald Trump has t***sformed the United States into a laughing stock and he is a danger to the world. He must be removed from the White House before things get even worse.

A DER SPIEGEL Editorial by Klaus Brinkbäumer

May 19, 2017 06:18 PM

Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. He does not possess the requisite intellect and does not understand the significance of the office he holds nor the tasks associated with it. He doesn't read. He doesn't bother to peruse important files and intelligence reports and knows little about the issues that he has identified as his priorities. His decisions are capricious and they are delivered in the form of tyrannical decrees.

He is a man free of morals. As has been demonstrated hundreds of times, he is a liar, a r****t and a c***t. I feel ashamed to use these words, as sharp and loud as they are. But if they apply to anyone, they apply to Trump. And one of the media's tasks is to continue telling things as they are: Trump has to be removed from the White House. Quickly. He is a danger to the world.

Trump is a miserable politician. He fired the FBI director simply because he could. James Comey had gotten under his skin with his investigation into Trump's confidants. Comey had also refused to swear loyalty and fealty to Trump and to abandon the investigation. He had to go.

Trump is also a miserable boss. His people invent excuses for him and lie on his behalf because they have to, but then Trump wakes up and posts tweets that contradict what they have said. He doesn't care that his spokesman, his secretary of state and his national security adviser had just denied that the president had handed Russia (of all countries) sensitive intelligence gleaned from Israel (of all countries). Trump tweeted: Yes, yes, I did, because I can. I'm president after all.

Nothing is as it should be in this White House. Everyone working there has been c*********d multiple times and now they all despise each other - and everyone except for Trump despises Trump. Because of all that, after just 120 days of the Trump administration, we are witness to an American tragedy for which there are five theoretical solutions.

The first is Trump's resignation, which won't happen. The second is that Republicans in the House and Senate support impeachment, which would be justified by the president's proven obstruction of justice, but won't happen because of the Republicans' thirst for power, which they won't willingly give up. The third possible solution is the invocation of the 25th Amendment, which would require the cabinet to declare Trump unfit to discharge the powers of the presidency. That isn't particularly likely either. Fourth: The Democrats get ready to fight and win back majorities in the House and Senate in midterm e******ns, which are 18 months away, before they then pursue option two, impeachment. Fifth: the international community wakes up and finds a way to circumvent the White House and free itself of its dependence on the U.S. Unlike the preceding four options, the fifth doesn't directly solve the Trump problem, but it is nevertheless necessary - and possible.

Not quite two weeks ago, a number of experts and politicians focused on foreign policy met in Washington at the invitation of the Munich Security Conference. It wasn't difficult to sense the atmosphere of chaos and agony that has descended upon the city.

The U.S. elected a laughing stock to the presidency and has now made itself dependent on a joke of a man. The country is, as David Brooks wrote recently in the New York Times, dependent on a child. The Trump administration has no foreign policy because Trump has consistently promised American withdrawal while invoking America's strength. He has promised both no wars and more wars. He makes decisions according to his mood, with no strategic coherence or tactical logic. Moscow and Beijing are laughing at America. Elsewhere, people are worried.

In the Pacific, warships - American and Chinese - circle each other in close proximity. The conflict with North Korea is escalating. Who can be certain that Donald T***p w*n't risk nuclear war simply to save his own skin? Efforts to stop c*****e c****e are in trouble and many expect the U.S. to withdraw from the Paris Agreement because Trump is wary of legally binding measures. Crises, including those in Syria and Libya, are escalating, but no longer being discussed. And who should they be discussed with? Phone calls and emails to the U.S. State Department go unanswered. Nothing is regulated, nothing is stable and the t***s-Atlantic relationship hardly exists anymore. German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel and Bundestag Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Norbert Röttgen fly back and forth, but Germany and the U.S. no longer understand each other. Hardly any real communication takes place, there are no joint foreign policy goals and there is no strategy.

In "Game of Thrones," the Mad King was murdered (and the child that later took his place was no better). In real life, an immature boy sits on the throne of the most important country in the world. He could, at any time, issue a catastrophic order that would immediately be carried out. That is why the parents cannot afford to take their eyes off him even for a second. They cannot succumb to exhaustion because he is so taxing. They ultimately have to send him to his room - and return power to the grownups.

PeterS

He know's what he's doing? He strings words together never knowing what he's saying until they have all come out. Worse, he may well change his rhetoric with his very next tweet. We are fortunate that Kim backed down but next time he may very well not. Conservatives love a bully especially when he is their own. But bullies aren't always successful and when nukes are at the heart of everything failure here would be down right deadly...

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Kim didn't back down............because he was never up there. Had Trump, or anyone else, ever bothered to read a little, they'd see that Kim does this same s**t with every new administration. His daddy did it, so did his grandpappy. If Trump had any advisors worth a s**t, if he'd ever read a briefing or listened to one, he'd have known to ignore Kim publicly. He'd have sent a message through proper diplomatic channels informing Kim that his rockets would be shot down, to drop on his own head.

Two fat little babies squabbling in public, is a case for a time out or at least separating the two. It is an embarrassment to America, and cannot, nor should not, be defended as some sort of genius foreign policy. It is the very definition of ridiculous.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

A spanking and a time out are definitely called for.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Really?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-fg-guam-north-korea-20170814-story.html

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Yep, we've heard this story before, many times. I don't expect the i***t media to do it's homework, there's no excitement to be found there. We're not in the business of generating panic are we?

Louie27 Loc: Peoria, AZ

One reporter that is not in the government and has only his views to report. Just like our lame stream media.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Did you not read the entire article? Government officials were referenced near the bottom....'Phone calls and emails to the U.S. State Department go unanswered. Nothing is regulated, nothing is stable and the t***s-Atlantic relationship hardly exists anymore. German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel and Bundestag Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Norbert Röttgen fly back and forth, but Germany and the U.S. no longer understand each other. Hardly any real communication takes place, there are no joint foreign policy goals and there is no strategy.'

Your opinion is less convincing or reliable than one with connections to German governmental officials. Besides, there are numerous articles regarding the disarray of our U.S. State Department throughout the world, to include especially Europe. For example, as follows.....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A world of hurt: Trump’s foreign policy so far is a mess

BY Brian Klaas*, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS; Saturday, April 29, 2017, 5:00 PM

On the eve of completing 100 days in office, Trump lamented that he missed his old life. "I loved my previous life," he told a reporter wistfully. "This is more work than in my previous life. I thought it would be easier."

Yes, Donald Trump believed that being a reality TV host who occasionally slapped his name on a building or a failed steak venture would be tougher and more work than the hardest job on the planet.

And that's why the first 100 days of his foreign policy has played out basically as you'd expect from the most unqualified and unprepared President in modern history who is clearly out of his league.

That doesn't mean that the Trump administration's debut on the world stage has been a complete train wreck — it hasn't and there have been some positives. But it does mean that Trump's unpreparedness, recklessness and lack of a strategy are a menace to the world.

Given the way we tend to analyze Presidents, and defer to their judgment on matters of national security, it's easy to paper over the problem.

Pundits have a natural impulse to assess Trump in a seemingly even-handed way. To appear fair-minded, they look at his recent actions and then weigh up the positives next to the negatives.

But with Trump's foreign policy, that's an absurd and naïve way of analyzing him.

Yes, his airstrike on Syria sent an important message that chemical weapons have no place in a civilized world. And yes, the realities of the presidency have constrained him in important ways that led Trump to a much more conventional foreign policy. Those are undoubtedly significant positives worth noting.

The first 100 days of President Trump's foreign policy has played out basically as you'd expect from the most unqualified and unprepared President in modern history who is clearly out of his league.

But then you remember that he is taking advice during a nuclear standoff with North Korea from his son-in-law, a 36-year-old real estate developer, and his daughter, an equally unqualified jewelry seller.

Next, you recall that there is an active FBI investigation into whether the President and his team actively colluded with America's main foreign policy adversary, Russia, to undermine the integrity of American e******ns.

Then, with a jolt, you remember that Trump threatened North Korea with an "armada" that was, in fact, steaming in the opposite direction 3,300 miles from Seoul — misleading the American public and key American allies for days afterward.

And finally, you remember that there is not a single check or balance to stop Trump, an impulsive conspiracy theorist who often appears to live in an alternate reality, from nuking anything he likes.

In other words, trying to judge Trump's foreign policy through the first 100 days by comparing his actions to the 100 days of Obama or Bush or Clinton or Reagan is a silly mistake. He's not like them.

Trump is a mercurial and almost proudly ignorant President who has publicly acknowledged that he didn't really understand North Korea until China's President briefly gave him a 10 minute Wikipedia-style overview at Mar-a-Lago.

He reversed course on NATO, acknowledging that his earlier view was mistaken because he didn't know much about the subject.

"People don't go around asking about NATO if I'm building a building in Manhattan, right?" he recently said in his defense. No, Mr. President, they don't, but you're required to seek out knowledge about the United States' most important alliance and understand basics about North Korea before you enter the Oval Office.

This startling and self-aware lack of preparedness casts a shadow over every other foreign policy move, making even accomplishments seem like accidents.

Tracking the daily news cycle of this administration's foreign policy misses the point because the point is that the United States is now led by someone who is uniquely unprepared for the role of diplomat to the world and commander-in-chief.

That new reality is the single most important shift in the first 100 days of Trump's presidency.

But for a moment let's indulge Trump, play the pundit's game and try to see how his first 100 days measures up to his predecessors' in foreign policy.

A disturbing picture emerges. So far, the Trump Doctrine can be summarized as: a flashy mirage of strength with no strategy. And without a strategy, American interests will suffer while an already dangerous world becomes more volatile.

Let's start with Syria, where the Obama administration's policy was painfully hesitant if not incoherent.

To his credit, Trump rightly bombed Syria when the Assad regime used chemical weapons against its civilian population.

This is a genuine and important achievement; even if it accomplished nothing else, it put the world on notice that America would not stand idly by against the use of chemical munitions. Inaction on this front is easily the darkest stain on Obama's presidency, which had its share of foreign policy mistakes.

But after Trump ended his victory lap and pundits stopped swooning over images of "beautiful" cruise missiles exploding into patriotic fire, we were left with a few hard-to-swallow t***hs.

First, the airstrike achieved no strategic goals beyond, potentially, chemical weapons deterrence. Syria's butcher was back to barrel-bombing civilians — from the same airfield no less — just hours later.

That's a problem. Without a shift in U.S. tactics or consistent follow-through, the most likely outcome will be Assad staying in power — or an equally brutal successor also allied with Russia taking his place.

Second, Trump didn't have a plan for what came next, or any coordinated follow-through with Russia, Turkey or others. That was inevitable, because his administration chose to bomb Syria after stressing that they would not as recently as 24 hours earlier.

The sudden shift was driven by Trump's whiplash temperament, influenced by images on television — not by any sort of strategic or ideological thought process.

Trump, it turned out, had never really thought about what should trigger U.S. military intervention.

So when he saw images that upset him, that's what it took.

Not exactly high-level analysis.

We know just how muddled Trump's thinking is because he repeatedly condemned any airstrikes on Syria under Obama, even when Assad had k**led hundreds of thousands of civilians and used chemical weapons multiple times, k*****g countless "beautiful babies."

Being reactive to television images does not make a successful foreign policy, and it does not bode well for the future.

Third, Trump inadvertently showed Assad precisely where his "red line" would be: massacring hundreds of thousands of civilians would provoke no response from Washington, so long as Assad murdered his own people with conventional weapons.

You can be sure that harrowing lesson was not lost on the dictators, despots and thugs who brutalize their citizens in dozens of countries far afield from Syria.

Next, there's North Korea. While Trump is appropriately treating this unstable nuclear regime with the seriousness it warrants, Armadagate — wherein the President and his administration outright lied about the direction that aircraft carrier group was headed — was catastrophically counterproductive.

It did nothing to deter Kim Jong-un, and made the U.S. look like it was bluffing.

Worse, a key p**********l contender in South Korea, Hong Joonpyo, said that the deception about the ships had cost the White House one of its most important diplomatic assets: its credibility.

"What Mr. Trump said was very important for the national security of South Korea," he said. "If that was a lie, then during Trump's term, South Korea will not trust wh**ever Trump says."

The loss of credibility in diplomatic signaling doesn't make headlines, but America is less safe if governments around the world don't generally believe what the White House says. Trump has already given allies and adversaries alike plenty of reason to distrust him.

More to the point, though, it's impossible to separate Trump's North Korea foreign policy with the enhanced risk of nuclear war that comes with an impetuous leader who tweets threats at nuclear rivals and won't back down when his ego is challenged.

During the campaign, Trump reportedly asked advisers, about nuclear weapons: "If we have them, why can't we use them?" During the t***sition, he tweeted that the United States "must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes." He also used Twitter to threaten Kim Jong-un's regime, seemingly with military strikes.

That's something to worry about — and worry about a lot — because Twitter diplomacy, which Trump uses frequently, greatly enhances the risk of miscalculation.

In December, the world didn't take much notice, but Pakistan's foreign minister threatened to attack Israel with nuclear weapons because he had seen a f**e news article suggesting that Israel had threatened Pakistan.

That hits a bit too close to home in America, as Trump has repeatedly tweeted out f**e articles and false claims. Still, even as he's threatening nuclear rivals, nobody is proof-reading his tweets.

(We know that because of the routine typos and bizarre stream-of-consciousness outbursts that we now accept as normal p**********l communication.)

Diplomacy on the brink of conflict is always prone to miscommunication and miscalculation — even with carefully worded communiqués designed to send clear signals abroad. With Trump's Twitter outbursts, the risk of catastrophic miscalculation increases dramatically.

That makes us less safe, because we must rely on Kim Jong-un accurately interpreting the same Trump tweets that many Americans struggle to understand. Watch!

Finally, Trump, the self-proclaimed world's greatest deal-maker, has made it politically impossible for many governments to make deals with him.

Trump is a politically toxic figure in, to name just a few: Mexico, Germany and the UK, where he sparked a diplomatic row by falsely claiming that Britain's digital intelligence service wiretapped Trump Tower.

Any Mexican politician who wanted to work with the United States to achieve mutually beneficial goals would now be committing political suicide in doing so. The costs of that alienation amongst allies will continue to accrue throughout the remaining years of Trump's presidency.

And Trump's easily exposed bluffs (most recently on withdrawing from NAFTA) has meant that foreign powers simply don't find threats from him to be credible. That matters because the United States can't get what it wants if nobody believes what its President says.

Trump is right about one thing. The first 100 days benchmark is an arbitrary one. We can focus on the day-to-day shifts in his foreign policy, which flips and flops with a lot of bluster but without a guiding strategy. Doing so, however, may lead us to lose focus on the biggest shift in American foreign policy since World War II: from a series of qualified, measured and well-informed Presidents to a man who is none of the above. And that's the story that will continue to be most relevant for the next 1,360 days.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
*Brian Klaas is a fellow in comparative politics at the London School of Economics and author of "The Despot's Accomplice: How the West is Aiding and Abetting the Decline of Democracy."

buffalo Loc: Texas

Pure moonbat drivel! Although the left wing of the DC chicken (that is counterrevolutionary's term and I like it) and their monkey media will never give Trump any credit, lil kim took his threat serious enough to back down. Germany's Merkel and Trump don't get along but who the hell cares. Europe is being swamped by radical mooslime scum, is becoming a hellhole and the EU will soon fall apart. Trump is not a pussy like obammy and is encountering resistence at every turn in his Presidency. The few that dared speak against obammy's failed foreign policy (red lines and reset buttons don't work) and EOs were labeled R****TS. Trump is putting America first and if that prevents other countries from being able to fuck us on trade or what ever, I think that is a good thing.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Since neither of the articles I posted were written by anyone from "DC," your argument holds little water. You often come up with some salient and reasonable comments/posts/threads...none of which exist in this particular instance. As you wrote..."Pure moon-bat drivel" on your part.

Journalist Alan Feuer said the Daily News focuses heavily on "deep sourcing and doorstep reporting", providing city-centered "crime reportage and hard-hitting coverage of public issues...rather than portraying New York through the partisan divide between liberals and conservatives". According to Feuer, the paper is known for "speaking to and for the city’s working class" and for "its crusades against municipal misconduct".

The Daily News's editorial stance has been described as "flexibly centrist" with a "high-minded, if populist, legacy". The News endorsed Republican George W. Bush in the 2004 p**********l e******n, Democrat Barack Obama in 2008, Republican Mitt Romney in 2012, and Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

BTW, did you read far enough to catch this part of the article:

'Next, there's North Korea. While Trump is appropriately treating this unstable nuclear regime with the seriousness it warrants, Armadagate — wherein the President and his administration outright lied about the direction that aircraft carrier group was headed — was catastrophically counterproductive.

It did nothing to deter Kim Jong-un, and made the U.S. look like it was bluffing.

Worse, a key p**********l contender in South Korea, Hong Joonpyo, said that the deception about the ships had cost the White House one of its most important diplomatic assets: its credibility.

'What Mr. Trump said was very important for the national security of South Korea,' he said. 'If that was a lie, then during Trump's term, South Korea will not trust wh**ever Trump says.'

The loss of credibility in diplomatic signaling doesn't make headlines, but America is less safe if governments around the world don't generally believe what the White House says. Trump has already given allies and adversaries alike plenty of reason to distrust him.

More to the point, though, it's impossible to separate Trump's North Korea foreign policy with the enhanced risk of nuclear war that comes with an impetuous leader who tweets threats at nuclear rivals and won't back down when his ego is challenged."

buffalo Loc: Texas

So what? All that means is they support either wing of the DC chicken. Klaas is a liberal clown of a journalist. How does he know who the hell Trump is getting his advice from. So far, lil kim has stood down. A real estate developer and a jewelry dealer are probably wiser to the ways of the world than a fu(king community organizer and racial divider.

While President Trump deserves credit that he will not get for forcing lil kim into temporary submission, China has also played an important role in talking the North Korean dictator back from the brink of disaster. Beijing, too, understands that the U.S. is done playing around with obammy’s games of red lines and reset buttons They do not work. The time for talk is over. As long as lil kim is making threats and progressing towards an intercontinental nuclear missile, the U.S. has nothing to say to him. And if he keeps it up, it will be goodnight for this regime. China sees the writing on the wall, and they are FINALLY bringing serious pressure to bear on Pyongyang. Why? Because China sees NK as a buffer, took Trump message seriously and does not want it reduced to a trash dump.

Germany and most of the rest of Europe are appeasing and ass kissing mooslime scum to the point of the whole region becoming a mooslime s**thole. Trump sees and understands this.