What Does Trump Mean When He Says "America First"?

#1
Rasputin_Vol

Rasputin_Vol

"Slava Ukraina"
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
72,056
Likes
39,840
#1
Seems like some assume it means that we are going to curl up into a shell and pull away from the world in terms of trade and military. I personally think we can stand to pull back militarily from several places, but I don't see it as a pull back in trade and commerce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2
#2
Or he very well could realize how important this nation is to the world as a whole, in terms of economic and military power and knows our rightful place as a world leader. Something ignored for the past eight years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#3
#3
Rasputin_Vol said:
Seems like some assume it means that we are going to curl up into a shell and pull away from the world in terms of trade and military. I personally think we can stand to pull back militarily from several places, but I don't see it as a pull back in trade and commerce.
Click to expand...

This country has reached a crucial time in its existence. A lot of people are oblivious to this. We need to be a leader in this world, without doubt, but we are following a global agenda that succumbs to the elite...and the elite only...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#4
#4
Just ask the acting attorney general who disobeyed his order on extreme immigrant vetting ...he just dropped a Moab on her head.. boom fired tonight.... Obama hold over waiting on sessions approval
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#12
#12
"America first" is such a misleading way to frame it.

Every president believes in America first, it's really how you view a given issue short term or long term as in our best interests. For example, on trade, is the issue a short term advantage to one side or the other, ie immediate benefit to America? Or is it that you think it's worth short term disadvantage to the US to gain long term position of advantage?

Obama clearly believed in the latter. Trump thinks that the long term benefits are not worth the short term disadvantages of some of these pacts. Both have arguments in support.
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
"America first" is such a misleading way to frame it.

Every president believes in America first, it's really how you view a given issue short term or long term as in our best interests. For example, on trade, is the issue a short term advantage to one side or the other, ie immediate benefit to America? Or is it that you think it's worth short term disadvantage to the US to gain long term position of advantage?

Obama clearly believed in the latter. Trump thinks that the long term benefits are not worth the short term disadvantages of some of these pacts. Both have arguments in support.
Click to expand...

Yes. Look at those long term gains Obama made with Iran and Russia. A true genius he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
lawgator1 said:
"America first" is such a misleading way to frame it.

Every president believes in America first, it's really how you view a given issue short term or long term as in our best interests. For example, on trade, is the issue a short term advantage to one side or the other, ie immediate benefit to America? Or is it that you think it's worth short term disadvantage to the US to gain long term position of advantage?

Obama clearly believed in the latter. Trump thinks that the long term benefits are not worth the short term disadvantages of some of these pacts. Both have arguments in support.
Click to expand...

Blah....Blah....Blah......Whiner
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
He means no more overlooking this ****

524333626.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#16
#16
allvol123 said:
Yes. Look at those long term gains Obama made with Iran and Russia. A true genius he is.
Click to expand...


Obama would say that you are thinking too short term. The binary choice with Iran was make a deal, or have them proceed with their program and likely a war with Israel, and by proxy the US. The alternative was chosen, which was to slow them down, and as of today they do not have a weapon and they are not at war with Israel, and by proxy, us.

If the deal is torn up by Trump, what happens next, hm? You think its a "better deal"? I think Iran ignores us, goes their own way, perhaps with some Russian influence, and Israel has a tough choice to make.

So let's say Trump does as he promised, the deal is gone, and Iran is back on the fast track. Does Israel attack Iran? And where does that leave us? Trump doesn't want to get into any wars, right? And this one might be undertaken by Israel, first.

So what do we do if Israel sends jets to bomb suspected Iranian nuclear sites? And what happens when the ordinance hits those sites and releases radioactive material into the atmosphere? All because Trump tore up the bad short term deal because, in his view, long term it is not worth it?

You better have an answer ready, because its not going to be pretty.
 
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
"America first" is such a misleading way to frame it.

Every president believes in America first, it's really how you view a given issue short term or long term as in our best interests. For example, on trade, is the issue a short term advantage to one side or the other, ie immediate benefit to America? Or is it that you think it's worth short term disadvantage to the US to gain long term position of advantage?

Obama clearly believed in the latter. Trump thinks that the long term benefits are not worth the short term disadvantages of some of these pacts. Both have arguments in support.
Click to expand...
$$$
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7668.jpg
    IMG_7668.jpg
    44.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
Rasputin_Vol said:
Seems like some assume it means that we are going to curl up into a shell and pull away from the world in terms of trade and military. I personally think we can stand to pull back militarily from several places, but I don't see it as a pull back in trade and commerce.
Click to expand...

I think he want more trade especially with more exports from America. The Chinese will only buy our cars if we open a joint venture factory in China so they can steal our technology. They maintain a 30% tariff on cars from Europe. This is a huge growing market that we are eliminated from. Chinese people love American products but we are not allowed to export them even with tariff. They leave us with a trade deficit while they maintain the opposite. They are a protectionist country not to mention the control of the currency value. To clarify, their currency is not freely traded like other currencies. Go down to the bank or your broker and try to by $50,000 in the Yuan. Never happen they don't allow it. At the same time they set the value arbitrarily instead of market determination. This gives them a huge advantage in exporting as all of their products are artificially low in price.
 
#19
#19
lawgator1 said:
Obama would say that you are thinking too short term. The binary choice with Iran was make a deal, or have them proceed with their program and likely a war with Israel, and by proxy the US. The alternative was chosen, which was to slow them down, and as of today they do not have a weapon and they are not at war with Israel, and by proxy, us.

If the deal is torn up by Trump, what happens next, hm? You think its a "better deal"? I think Iran ignores us, goes their own way, perhaps with some Russian influence, and Israel has a tough choice to make.

So let's say Trump does as he promised, the deal is gone, and Iran is back on the fast track. Does Israel attack Iran? And where does that leave us? Trump doesn't want to get into any wars, right? And this one might be undertaken by Israel, first.

So what do we do if Israel sends jets to bomb suspected Iranian nuclear sites? And what happens when the ordinance hits those sites and releases radioactive material into the atmosphere? All because Trump tore up the bad short term deal because, in his view, long term it is not worth it?

You better have an answer ready, because its not going to be pretty.
Click to expand...

Good god man get a grip & stop w/all the speculation of doomsday is near.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#21
#21
lawgator1 said:
We have yet to see how Trump is going to react to these inevitable provocations. I, for one, have very little faith right now that his decision-making process will be calm, lucid, and deliberate.
Click to expand...

Still....there's the need to calm down & wait. We aren't at war with anyone.
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
We have yet to see how Trump is going to react to these inevitable provocations. I, for one, have very little faith right now that his decision-making process will be calm, lucid, and deliberate.
Click to expand...

If that's the case you two have a lot in common.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#23
#23
Rasputin_Vol said:
Seems like some assume it means that we are going to curl up into a shell and pull away from the world in terms of trade and military. I personally think we can stand to pull back militarily from several places, but I don't see it as a pull back in trade and commerce.
Click to expand...

It is an incremental move away from the international system that the United States created and has been running since the end of WWII.

After WWII, the United States, because we won the war and were basically the only national power in a position to do it, told the rest of the world via Bretton Woods that we would secure the world's oceans with our Navy, create a free trade system for the world to do business in (except the Soviets), and provide global security.

If Trump follows through on the rhetoric, the United States is not going to stop roaming the world's oceans, but it is going to opportunistically not intervene in certain geopolitical situations where it might have in the past, encourage or tell allies to start pulling their weight for military/security costs, and go back to a more inward-looking domestic economic policy about having more jobs at home (even if that means higher prices) and money directed towards internal projects.

I think that's what he means by "America first."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#24
#24
Rasputin_Vol said:
Seems like some assume it means that we are going to curl up into a shell and pull away from the world in terms of trade and military. I personally think we can stand to pull back militarily from several places, but I don't see it as a pull back in trade and commerce.
Click to expand...

I see it as ensuring that government dealings have America's best interests in mind and not the drooling pandering interests that democrats show to everyone but the USA.
 
#25
#25
lawgator1 said:
Obama would say that you are thinking too short term. The binary choice with Iran was make a deal, or have them proceed with their program and likely a war with Israel, and by proxy the US. The alternative was chosen, which was to slow them down, and as of today they do not have a weapon and they are not at war with Israel, and by proxy, us.
Click to expand...

But it wasn't a binary choice and only became that because Obama from the beginning (even before the election) openly signaled the goal was A DEAL.

He implicitly took the side of Iran's leadership during the Green Revolution. Like his actions on Gitmo the end game (a deal for Iran, close it for Gitmo) was all that mattered - good process or bad; good outcomes or bad.

He was naive and a bad negotiator. The ability to get a better deal now is hampered by the approach Team Obama took - a deal at all costs; the deal is more important than the terms.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top