4 ms·

What realistically has changed with the relationships? Renegotiate a few trade deals, chastise countries for (probably) not meeting guidelines they agreed to, s

What realistically has changed with the relationships? Renegotiate a few trade deals, chastise countries for (probably) not meeting guidelines they agreed to, slap countries on the wrist when they try to side-step international trade norms...these aren't earth-shattering things, and have all happened in the past. The only difference was that there was not the hysterical air in the media surrounding POTUS.

hef19898 8y ago
I think it's two-fold. One thing is the message, regardless of your personel point of view any government has the right to adress any topiuc they wish with other countries. And then there is the communication part. There are long established diplomatic standards which are ignored and even violated on a constant basis. The last part is in itself a serious problem, flawed reasoning behind the messages are a compounding factor.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
addicted 8y ago
A lot has changed. People simply don’t see the US as a reliable ally anymore. And this isn’t just the same as before. Past Presidents don’t claim that NATO partners owe the US money based on a misunderstanding of how NATO works (they have complained about NATO partners not pulling their weight which is why all of them have set concrete targets for increasing involvement which are set to take place over a few more years, for which of course Trump will try to take credit ignoring that these were negotiated by Bush/Obama). They also didn’t pull out of treaties such as the Iran deal or the Paris climate accord the way Trump did, or constantly threaten countries about pulling out of treaties that the US pushed for and drive such as NAFTA or TPP. They also didn’t try to wreck other countries’ economies based on the fact that they need to placate their base such as with NATO ally Turkey. They also didn’t spread lies and misinformation about partner countries based on the latest Fox News conspiracy without first checking with the largest intelligence operations in the world which is available to them like he did with falsehood about London and the U.K. before visiting. They also didn’t have allied intelligence agencies basically stop sharing sensitive information with their US intelligence counterparts because they leaked (inadvertently or deliberately) it to Putin. There is a lot more than just “media hysterics” that make things different.
- mistermann 8y ago
  > Past Presidents don’t claim that NATO partners owe the US money based on a misunderstanding of how NATO works (they have complained about NATO partners not pulling their weight which is why all of them have set concrete targets for increasing involvement which are set to take place over a few more years, for which of course Trump will try to take credit ignoring that these were negotiated by Bush/Obama). Can you explain your differentiation to me on how past presidents complaints about NATO members not meeting obligations is based on a proper understanding of how NATO works, but the current president's same complaints are based on a misunderstanding of how NATO works?
- acct1771 8y ago
  What conspiracy was Fox News part of, in your sentence? Or did you mean conspiracy theory?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

hef19898 8y ago

I think it's two-fold. One thing is the message, regardless of your personel point of view any government has the right to adress any topiuc they wish with other countries. And then there is the communication part. There are long established diplomatic standards which are ignored and even violated on a constant basis. The last part is in itself a serious problem, flawed reasoning behind the messages are a compounding factor.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

addicted 8y ago

A lot has changed. People simply don’t see the US as a reliable ally anymore. And this isn’t just the same as before. Past Presidents don’t claim that NATO partners owe the US money based on a misunderstanding of how NATO works (they have complained about NATO partners not pulling their weight which is why all of them have set concrete targets for increasing involvement which are set to take place over a few more years, for which of course Trump will try to take credit ignoring that these were negotiated by Bush/Obama). They also didn’t pull out of treaties such as the Iran deal or the Paris climate accord the way Trump did, or constantly threaten countries about pulling out of treaties that the US pushed for and drive such as NAFTA or TPP. They also didn’t try to wreck other countries’ economies based on the fact that they need to placate their base such as with NATO ally Turkey. They also didn’t spread lies and misinformation about partner countries based on the latest Fox News conspiracy without first checking with the largest intelligence operations in the world which is available to them like he did with falsehood about London and the U.K. before visiting. They also didn’t have allied intelligence agencies basically stop sharing sensitive information with their US intelligence counterparts because they leaked (inadvertently or deliberately) it to Putin. There is a lot more than just “media hysterics” that make things different.

mistermann 8y ago
> Past Presidents don’t claim that NATO partners owe the US money based on a misunderstanding of how NATO works (they have complained about NATO partners not pulling their weight which is why all of them have set concrete targets for increasing involvement which are set to take place over a few more years, for which of course Trump will try to take credit ignoring that these were negotiated by Bush/Obama). Can you explain your differentiation to me on how past presidents complaints about NATO members not meeting obligations is based on a proper understanding of how NATO works, but the current president's same complaints are based on a misunderstanding of how NATO works?
acct1771 8y ago
What conspiracy was Fox News part of, in your sentence? Or did you mean conspiracy theory?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]