America First. R U Sure?

[OldLady]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

What isolationist policy? What on Earth are you talking about?

Read the OP

 

[irosie91]

I wanted to share this conservative's view on Trump's foreign policy.

Charles Krauthammer: Trump's foreign-policy revolution

• 
  
  
  • By Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post
    
  • Jan 29, 2017
    

WASHINGTON — The flurry of bold executive orders and of highly provocative Cabinet nominations (such as a secretary of education who actually believes in school choice) has been encouraging to conservative skeptics of Donald Trump. But it shouldn’t erase the troubling memory of one major element of Trump’s inaugural address.

The foreign policy section has received far less attention than so revolutionary a declaration deserved. It radically redefined the American national interest as understood since World War II.

Trump outlined a world in which foreign relations are collapsed into a zero-sum game. They gain, we lose. As in: “For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry; subsidized the armies of other countries” while depleting our own. And most provocatively this: “The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world.”


JFK’s inaugural pledged to support any friend and oppose any foe to assure the success of liberty. Note that Trump makes no distinction between friend and foe (and no reference to liberty). They’re all out to use, exploit and surpass us.

No more, declared Trump: “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America First.”

Imagine how this resonates abroad. “America First” was the name of the organization led by Charles Lindbergh that bitterly fought FDR before U.S. entry into World War II — right through the Battle of Britain — to keep America neutral between Churchill’s Britain and Hitler’s Reich.

Not that Trump was consciously imitating Lindbergh. I doubt he was even aware of the reference. He just liked the phrase. But I can assure you that in London and in every world capital they are aware of the antecedent and the intimations of a new American isolationism. Trump gave them good reason to think so, going on to note “the right of all nations to put their own interests first.” America included.

Some claim that putting America first is a reassertion of American exceptionalism. On the contrary, it is the antithesis. It makes America no different from all the other countries that define themselves by a particularist blood-and-soil nationalism. What made America exceptional, unique in the world, was defining its own national interest beyond its narrow economic and security needs to encompass the safety and prosperity of a vast array of allies. A free world marked by open trade and mutual defense was President Truman’s vision, shared by every president since.

Until now.

Some have argued that Trump is just dangling a bargaining chip to negotiate better terms of trade or alliance. Or that Trump’s views are so changeable and unstable — telling European newspapers two weeks ago that NATO is obsolete and then saying “NATO is very important to me” — that this is just another unmoored entry on a ledger of confusion.


But both claims are demonstrably wrong. An inaugural address is no off-the-cuff riff. These words are the product of at least three weeks of deliberate crafting for an address that Trump said would express his philosophy. Moreover, to remove any ambiguity, Trump prefaced his “America first” proclamation with: “From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.”

Trump’s vision misunderstands the logic underlying the far larger, far-reaching view of Truman. The Marshall Plan sure took wealth away from the American middle class and distributed it abroad. But for a reason. Altruism, in part. But mostly to stabilize Western Europe as a bulwark against an existential global enemy.

We carried many free riders throughout the Cold War. The burden was heavy. But this was not a mindless act of charity; it was an exercise in enlightened self-interest. After all, it was indeed better to subsidize foreign armies — German, South Korean, Turkish and dozens of others — and have them stand with us, rather than stationing even more American troops everywhere around the world at greater risk of both blood and treasure.

We are embarking upon insularity and smallness. Nor is this just theory. Trump’s long-promised but nonetheless abrupt withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership is the momentous first fruit of his foreign policy doctrine. Last year the prime minister of Singapore told John McCain that if we pulled out of TPP “you’ll be finished in Asia.” He knows the region.

For 70 years, we sustained an international system of open commerce and democratic alliances that has enabled America and the West to grow and thrive. Global leadership is what made America great. We abandon it at our peril.


Charles Krauthammer writes for The Washington Post. Email: [email protected].

rosie >>>playing with semantics like words are silly putty

old lady >>>Which words are those, Rosie?

rosie ONE SMALL EXAMPLE among many>>>>>JFK’s inaugural pledged to support any friend and oppose any foe to assure the success of liberty. Note that Trump makes no distinction between friend and foe (and no reference to liberty). They’re all out to use, exploit and surpass us.

 

[sealybobo]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

I heard that too this weekend. If we back off and stay out of world events, then we lower our influence around the world. Trump is a slippery slope. We are letting a hot head arrogant jerk who thinks he knows everything make rash decisions just like he did before his last 9 bankruptsies. We are insane.

 

[TNHarley]

I said fuck exceptionalism. And if you think what we have now is "free trade", you are mistaken. Our trade deals are corporate whores.
Our rich get richer and our middle class gets poorer. No thanks.

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat. Of course trade deals enter into that, I realize they do. But I don't think Krauthammer is primarily talking about trade, is he?

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat.
Who comes to the aid of the top dog?
Also, even if we pissed off the entire EU and we got invaded by Russia AND China (only way we would get messed up) they would STILL come to us. If we fell like that, they would be next.
The entire OP is a biased hack job.
But I will give the hack credit.. the markets crashed just like he said they woul.....
oh wait, nevermind
Boom: Dow hits 20,000 for first time ever

I don't get it. You think if we stop extending financial and military aid to our allies, that they won't go somewhere else (fill in the blank) for it? You think they'll follow us anyway? If we were invaded by Russia it would be AFTER all the EU had fallen, TN. After we were no longer interested in helping them. That's how I see it.

Russia is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union.

It is not a threat to Europe, and certainly not US.

It was so important to you that they like us. They like Trump better than Hillary. That was a selling point you said. But now England, Mexico, Canada and Germany don't like Trump. Do you care?

That's the way it has been for months now. Its nothing new. So what makes you think it would matter NOW?

 

[sealybobo]

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat. Of course trade deals enter into that, I realize they do. But I don't think Krauthammer is primarily talking about trade, is he?

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat.
Who comes to the aid of the top dog?
Also, even if we pissed off the entire EU and we got invaded by Russia AND China (only way we would get messed up) they would STILL come to us. If we fell like that, they would be next.
The entire OP is a biased hack job.
But I will give the hack credit.. the markets crashed just like he said they woul.....
oh wait, nevermind
Boom: Dow hits 20,000 for first time ever

I don't get it. You think if we stop extending financial and military aid to our allies, that they won't go somewhere else (fill in the blank) for it? You think they'll follow us anyway? If we were invaded by Russia it would be AFTER all the EU had fallen, TN. After we were no longer interested in helping them. That's how I see it.

Russia is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union.

It is not a threat to Europe, and certainly not US.

It was so important to you that they like us. They like Trump better than Hillary. That was a selling point you said. But now England, Mexico, Canada and Germany don't like Trump. Do you care?

That's the way it has been for months now. Its nothing new. So what makes you think it would matter NOW?

You mean you've been a hypocrite for months? I agree. Yea, it only matters when we vote in 2018 and 2020. Right now I'm just armchair qb'ing. You guys know all about that.

 

[Derelict_Drvr]

This insistence the Trump's America First is like the America First Committee of 1939 is crap. Crap that is perpetuate by Leftist media propaganda hit pieces. The 2017 America First has nothing in common with the 1939 America First Committee.

The 1939 America First Committee was a movement that wanted American isolationism to keep America out of the European Conflict.

America First Committee - Wikipedia

To define the 2017 America First, I will use Donald Trump's own words:

“Americans must know that we are putting the American people first again,” he said. “On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy — the jobs, incomes and security of the American worker will always be my first priority.”

“I will view the world through the clear lens of American interests,” he said.

“We will no longer,” he said, “surrender this country, or its people, to the false song of globalism.”

Trump's America First Policy Is Conservative Policy

Nowhere has President Trump stated that America should be isolated from the rest of the world.

 

[Vastator]

I wanted to share this conservative's view on Trump's foreign policy.

Charles Krauthammer: Trump's foreign-policy revolution

• 
  
  
  • By Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post
  • Jan 29, 2017

WASHINGTON — The flurry of bold executive orders and of highly provocative Cabinet nominations (such as a secretary of education who actually believes in school choice) has been encouraging to conservative skeptics of Donald Trump. But it shouldn’t erase the troubling memory of one major element of Trump’s inaugural address.

The foreign policy section has received far less attention than so revolutionary a declaration deserved. It radically redefined the American national interest as understood since World War II.

Trump outlined a world in which foreign relations are collapsed into a zero-sum game. They gain, we lose. As in: “For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry; subsidized the armies of other countries” while depleting our own. And most provocatively this: “The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world.”


JFK’s inaugural pledged to support any friend and oppose any foe to assure the success of liberty. Note that Trump makes no distinction between friend and foe (and no reference to liberty). They’re all out to use, exploit and surpass us.

No more, declared Trump: “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America First.”

Imagine how this resonates abroad. “America First” was the name of the organization led by Charles Lindbergh that bitterly fought FDR before U.S. entry into World War II — right through the Battle of Britain — to keep America neutral between Churchill’s Britain and Hitler’s Reich.

Not that Trump was consciously imitating Lindbergh. I doubt he was even aware of the reference. He just liked the phrase. But I can assure you that in London and in every world capital they are aware of the antecedent and the intimations of a new American isolationism. Trump gave them good reason to think so, going on to note “the right of all nations to put their own interests first.” America included.

Some claim that putting America first is a reassertion of American exceptionalism. On the contrary, it is the antithesis. It makes America no different from all the other countries that define themselves by a particularist blood-and-soil nationalism. What made America exceptional, unique in the world, was defining its own national interest beyond its narrow economic and security needs to encompass the safety and prosperity of a vast array of allies. A free world marked by open trade and mutual defense was President Truman’s vision, shared by every president since.

Until now.

Some have argued that Trump is just dangling a bargaining chip to negotiate better terms of trade or alliance. Or that Trump’s views are so changeable and unstable — telling European newspapers two weeks ago that NATO is obsolete and then saying “NATO is very important to me” — that this is just another unmoored entry on a ledger of confusion.


But both claims are demonstrably wrong. An inaugural address is no off-the-cuff riff. These words are the product of at least three weeks of deliberate crafting for an address that Trump said would express his philosophy. Moreover, to remove any ambiguity, Trump prefaced his “America first” proclamation with: “From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.”

Trump’s vision misunderstands the logic underlying the far larger, far-reaching view of Truman. The Marshall Plan sure took wealth away from the American middle class and distributed it abroad. But for a reason. Altruism, in part. But mostly to stabilize Western Europe as a bulwark against an existential global enemy.

We carried many free riders throughout the Cold War. The burden was heavy. But this was not a mindless act of charity; it was an exercise in enlightened self-interest. After all, it was indeed better to subsidize foreign armies — German, South Korean, Turkish and dozens of others — and have them stand with us, rather than stationing even more American troops everywhere around the world at greater risk of both blood and treasure.

We are embarking upon insularity and smallness. Nor is this just theory. Trump’s long-promised but nonetheless abrupt withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership is the momentous first fruit of his foreign policy doctrine. Last year the prime minister of Singapore told John McCain that if we pulled out of TPP “you’ll be finished in Asia.” He knows the region.

For 70 years, we sustained an international system of open commerce and democratic alliances that has enabled America and the West to grow and thrive. Global leadership is what made America great. We abandon it at our peril.


Charles Krauthammer writes for The Washington Post. Email: [email protected].

Yes. I'm sure.

 

[irosie91]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

What isolationist policy? What on Earth are you talking about?

Read the OP

I wanted to share this conservative's view on Trump's foreign policy.

Charles Krauthammer: Trump's foreign-policy revolution

• 
  
  
  • By Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post
    
  • Jan 29, 2017
    

WASHINGTON — The flurry of bold executive orders and of highly provocative Cabinet nominations (such as a secretary of education who actually believes in school choice) has been encouraging to conservative skeptics of Donald Trump. But it shouldn’t erase the troubling memory of one major element of Trump’s inaugural address.

The foreign policy section has received far less attention than so revolutionary a declaration deserved. It radically redefined the American national interest as understood since World War II.

Trump outlined a world in which foreign relations are collapsed into a zero-sum game. They gain, we lose. As in: “For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry; subsidized the armies of other countries” while depleting our own. And most provocatively this: “The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world.”


JFK’s inaugural pledged to support any friend and oppose any foe to assure the success of liberty. Note that Trump makes no distinction between friend and foe (and no reference to liberty). They’re all out to use, exploit and surpass us.

No more, declared Trump: “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America First.”

Imagine how this resonates abroad. “America First” was the name of the organization led by Charles Lindbergh that bitterly fought FDR before U.S. entry into World War II — right through the Battle of Britain — to keep America neutral between Churchill’s Britain and Hitler’s Reich.

Not that Trump was consciously imitating Lindbergh. I doubt he was even aware of the reference. He just liked the phrase. But I can assure you that in London and in every world capital they are aware of the antecedent and the intimations of a new American isolationism. Trump gave them good reason to think so, going on to note “the right of all nations to put their own interests first.” America included.

Some claim that putting America first is a reassertion of American exceptionalism. On the contrary, it is the antithesis. It makes America no different from all the other countries that define themselves by a particularist blood-and-soil nationalism. What made America exceptional, unique in the world, was defining its own national interest beyond its narrow economic and security needs to encompass the safety and prosperity of a vast array of allies. A free world marked by open trade and mutual defense was President Truman’s vision, shared by every president since.

Until now.

Some have argued that Trump is just dangling a bargaining chip to negotiate better terms of trade or alliance. Or that Trump’s views are so changeable and unstable — telling European newspapers two weeks ago that NATO is obsolete and then saying “NATO is very important to me” — that this is just another unmoored entry on a ledger of confusion.


But both claims are demonstrably wrong. An inaugural address is no off-the-cuff riff. These words are the product of at least three weeks of deliberate crafting for an address that Trump said would express his philosophy. Moreover, to remove any ambiguity, Trump prefaced his “America first” proclamation with: “From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.”

Trump’s vision misunderstands the logic underlying the far larger, far-reaching view of Truman. The Marshall Plan sure took wealth away from the American middle class and distributed it abroad. But for a reason. Altruism, in part. But mostly to stabilize Western Europe as a bulwark against an existential global enemy.

We carried many free riders throughout the Cold War. The burden was heavy. But this was not a mindless act of charity; it was an exercise in enlightened self-interest. After all, it was indeed better to subsidize foreign armies — German, South Korean, Turkish and dozens of others — and have them stand with us, rather than stationing even more American troops everywhere around the world at greater risk of both blood and treasure.

We are embarking upon insularity and smallness. Nor is this just theory. Trump’s long-promised but nonetheless abrupt withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership is the momentous first fruit of his foreign policy doctrine. Last year the prime minister of Singapore told John McCain that if we pulled out of TPP “you’ll be finished in Asia.” He knows the region.

For 70 years, we sustained an international system of open commerce and democratic alliances that has enabled America and the West to grow and thrive. Global leadership is what made America great. We abandon it at our peril.


Charles Krauthammer writes for The Washington Post. Email: [email protected].

rosie >>>playing with semantics like words are silly putty

old lady >>>Which words are those, Rosie?

rosie ONE SMALL EXAMPLE among many>>>>>JFK’s inaugural pledged to support any friend and oppose any foe to assure the success of liberty. Note that Trump makes no distinction between friend and foe (and no reference to liberty). They’re all out to use, exploit and surpass us.

do you have any idea why your are 'thinking me' for your idiotic quotation?

you have cited what TRUMP DID NOT SAY-- the mark of a semantics
bullshitter

 

[Weatherman2020]

Hilarious watching the left cheer and applaud Krauthammer. Suckers.

 

[sealybobo]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

What isolationist policy? What on Earth are you talking about?

Read the OP

Why don't Republicans care that Trump just pissed on the Constitution?

The Constitution requires the executive branch, which includes DHS, to obey federal court orders as a check on its power. And they did not this weekend.

Senate Democrats Call For Investigation Into Trump Officials' Failure To Obey Court Orders | The Huffington Post

Trump's going to get impeached.

 

[TNHarley]

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat.
Who comes to the aid of the top dog?
Also, even if we pissed off the entire EU and we got invaded by Russia AND China (only way we would get messed up) they would STILL come to us. If we fell like that, they would be next.
The entire OP is a biased hack job.
But I will give the hack credit.. the markets crashed just like he said they woul.....
oh wait, nevermind
Boom: Dow hits 20,000 for first time ever

I don't get it. You think if we stop extending financial and military aid to our allies, that they won't go somewhere else (fill in the blank) for it? You think they'll follow us anyway? If we were invaded by Russia it would be AFTER all the EU had fallen, TN. After we were no longer interested in helping them. That's how I see it.

Russia is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union.

It is not a threat to Europe, and certainly not US.

It was so important to you that they like us. They like Trump better than Hillary. That was a selling point you said. But now England, Mexico, Canada and Germany don't like Trump. Do you care?

That's the way it has been for months now. Its nothing new. So what makes you think it would matter NOW?

You mean you've been a hypocrite for months? I agree. Yea, it only matters when we vote in 2018 and 2020. Right now I'm just armchair qb'ing. You guys know all about that.

What makes me a hypocrite?
First off, fuck you.
Second, I don't give two shits who don't like us. I don't like that trump is an embarrassment(he says some stupid shit) but I dont care who doesn't like it. Fuck everyone else. We need to focus on us. Our country is slowly going down the drain and all some people care about is "image". Hollywood have severely warped pathetic little brains. Its like everything is a popularity contest. Grow up.
Third, I was right and your ignorant bullshit doesn't change anything.

 

[sealybobo]

This insistence the Trump's America First is like the America First Committee of 1939 is crap. Crap that is perpetuate by Leftist media propaganda hit pieces. The 2017 America First has nothing in common with the 1939 America First Committee.

The 1939 America First Committee was a movement that wanted American isolationism to keep America out of the European Conflict.

America First Committee - Wikipedia

To define the 2017 America First, I will use Donald Trump's own words:

“Americans must know that we are putting the American people first again,” he said. “On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy — the jobs, incomes and security of the American worker will always be my first priority.”

“I will view the world through the clear lens of American interests,” he said.

“We will no longer,” he said, “surrender this country, or its people, to the false song of globalism.”

Trump's America First Policy Is Conservative Policy

Nowhere has President Trump stated that America should be isolated from the rest of the world.

If he's going to renig on trade deals and tariff Mexican imports he's kind of an isolationist just like England isn't going to get the benefits of being in the Euro.

 

[irosie91]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

What isolationist policy? What on Earth are you talking about?

Read the OP

Why don't Republicans care that Trump just pissed on the Constitution?

The Constitution requires the executive branch, which includes DHS, to obey federal court orders as a check on its power. And they did not this weekend.

Senate Democrats Call For Investigation Into Trump Officials' Failure To Obey Court Orders | The Huffington Post

Trump's going to get impeached.

really? where does it say that? (maybe it does----I just do not know---I know that the executive branch ---ie president----must obey the SUPREME COURT

 

[sealybobo]

I don't get it. You think if we stop extending financial and military aid to our allies, that they won't go somewhere else (fill in the blank) for it? You think they'll follow us anyway? If we were invaded by Russia it would be AFTER all the EU had fallen, TN. After we were no longer interested in helping them. That's how I see it.

Russia is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union.

It is not a threat to Europe, and certainly not US.

It was so important to you that they like us. They like Trump better than Hillary. That was a selling point you said. But now England, Mexico, Canada and Germany don't like Trump. Do you care?

That's the way it has been for months now. Its nothing new. So what makes you think it would matter NOW?

You mean you've been a hypocrite for months? I agree. Yea, it only matters when we vote in 2018 and 2020. Right now I'm just armchair qb'ing. You guys know all about that.

What makes me a hypocrite?
First off, fuck you.
Second, I don't give two shits who don't like us. I don't like that trump is an embarrassment(he says some stupid shit) but I dont care who doesn't like it. Fuck everyone else. We need to focus on us. Our country is slowly going down the drain and all some people care about is "image". Hollywood have severely warped pathetic little brains. Its like everything is a popularity contest. Grow up.
Third, I was right and your ignorant bullshit doesn't change anything.

See? Last year you guys cared what Russia thought but not what the rest of the world thought. Isn't that weird?

 

[sealybobo]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

What isolationist policy? What on Earth are you talking about?

Read the OP

Why don't Republicans care that Trump just pissed on the Constitution?

The Constitution requires the executive branch, which includes DHS, to obey federal court orders as a check on its power. And they did not this weekend.

Senate Democrats Call For Investigation Into Trump Officials' Failure To Obey Court Orders | The Huffington Post

Trump's going to get impeached.

really? where does it say that? (maybe it does----I just do not know---I know that the executive branch ---ie president----must obey the SUPREME COURT

If you don't know take my word for it.

 

[TNHarley]

This insistence the Trump's America First is like the America First Committee of 1939 is crap. Crap that is perpetuate by Leftist media propaganda hit pieces. The 2017 America First has nothing in common with the 1939 America First Committee.

The 1939 America First Committee was a movement that wanted American isolationism to keep America out of the European Conflict.

America First Committee - Wikipedia

To define the 2017 America First, I will use Donald Trump's own words:

“Americans must know that we are putting the American people first again,” he said. “On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy — the jobs, incomes and security of the American worker will always be my first priority.”

“I will view the world through the clear lens of American interests,” he said.

“We will no longer,” he said, “surrender this country, or its people, to the false song of globalism.”

Trump's America First Policy Is Conservative Policy

Nowhere has President Trump stated that America should be isolated from the rest of the world.

If he's going to renig on trade deals and tariff Mexican imports he's kind of an isolationist just like England isn't going to get the benefits of being in the Euro.

 

[Correll]

Not the slightest bit.

 

[irosie91]

As I feared, this thread is quickly going over my head. I never professed to be an "expert," but my biggest concern about Trump has always been this isolationist policy. I don't think it will be a positive outcome, and it worries me. I don't criticize every breath Trump takes just because I didn't vote for him. And I agree with SavannahMann that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO for what it has done in the past year. But we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We are one of the richest countries in the world. We do pay more to keep allies free as a bulwark against totalitarian regimes that would happily take them--and then us. That is in our best interests, imo.

What isolationist policy? What on Earth are you talking about?

Read the OP

Why don't Republicans care that Trump just pissed on the Constitution?

The Constitution requires the executive branch, which includes DHS, to obey federal court orders as a check on its power. And they did not this weekend.

Senate Democrats Call For Investigation Into Trump Officials' Failure To Obey Court Orders | The Huffington Post

Trump's going to get impeached.

really? where does it say that? (maybe it does----I just do not know---I know that the executive branch ---ie president----must obey the SUPREME COURT

If you don't know take my word for it.

'

I prefer a link

 

[TNHarley]

Russia is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union.

It is not a threat to Europe, and certainly not US.

It was so important to you that they like us. They like Trump better than Hillary. That was a selling point you said. But now England, Mexico, Canada and Germany don't like Trump. Do you care?

That's the way it has been for months now. Its nothing new. So what makes you think it would matter NOW?

You mean you've been a hypocrite for months? I agree. Yea, it only matters when we vote in 2018 and 2020. Right now I'm just armchair qb'ing. You guys know all about that.

What makes me a hypocrite?
First off, fuck you.
Second, I don't give two shits who don't like us. I don't like that trump is an embarrassment(he says some stupid shit) but I dont care who doesn't like it. Fuck everyone else. We need to focus on us. Our country is slowly going down the drain and all some people care about is "image". Hollywood have severely warped pathetic little brains. Its like everything is a popularity contest. Grow up.
Third, I was right and your ignorant bullshit doesn't change anything.

See? Last year you guys cared what Russia thought but not what the rest of the world thought. Isn't that weird?

"you guys".. again, fuck you.
Your only argument is a fallacy. Congratulations.

 

[Correll]

I said fuck exceptionalism. And if you think what we have now is "free trade", you are mistaken. Our trade deals are corporate whores.
Our rich get richer and our middle class gets poorer. No thanks.

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat. Of course trade deals enter into that, I realize they do. But I don't think Krauthammer is primarily talking about trade, is he?

I'm more concerned about the foreign relations piece and how it effects us if there is a serious military threat.
Who comes to the aid of the top dog?
Also, even if we pissed off the entire EU and we got invaded by Russia AND China (only way we would get messed up) they would STILL come to us. If we fell like that, they would be next.
The entire OP is a biased hack job.
But I will give the hack credit.. the markets crashed just like he said they woul.....
oh wait, nevermind
Boom: Dow hits 20,000 for first time ever

I don't get it. You think if we stop extending financial and military aid to our allies, that they won't go somewhere else (fill in the blank) for it? You think they'll follow us anyway? If we were invaded by Russia it would be AFTER all the EU had fallen, TN. After we were no longer interested in helping them. That's how I see it.

Russia is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union.

It is not a threat to Europe, and certainly not US.

Why don't you ask Eastern Europe about that? Or Ukraine? They live there and they are quite concerned, I hear.

Germany's not. ENgland's not. France isn't.

IF Europe is concerned, they are more than big enough to protect themselves from what is left of Russia.