Trump says US allies are "in many ways, worse than the enemy"

[Stevicus]

Trump says US allies are 'in many ways worse than the enemy' and claims Germany preferred Obama

President Donald Trump said that US allies in many ways treat “us worse than the enemy,” as he claimed that Germans prefer former president Barack Obama.

Speaking during a rally in Tampa, Florida, on Thursday, Mr Trump said that Democratic challenger Joe Biden’s policies would put the US in a “depression,” and weaken its strength on the international stage.

“He wants you to surrender our country to China, to all of these over countries that have taken total advantage of us,” President Trump said, as the crowd started to boo.

“You know in many ways our allies treat us worse than the enemy. The enemy at least we have our guard up. Our allies, what they have done to us in terms of military protection and trade is disgraceful.

It wasn't clear what Trump was referring to when he said the Germans preferred Obama.

“And when they come out and they say they like Barack Hussein Obama much more than they like Trump, that means I’m doing my job,” the president said as the booing intensified at the rally.

There do not appear to be any recent reports linking any members of the German government to comments about the country preferring Mr Obama to President Trump.

The Independent has contacted the Trump campaign for clarification on what President Trump was referring to with that remark.

However, the article noted that in recent years, the favorability rating of the US has fallen among residents of Allied countries:

However, a recent poll from the Pew Research Centre found that the favourability rating of the US from residents of allied countries has fallen dramatically over the last few years.

The poll found that only 41 per cent of people in the UK, 31 per cent in Canada and 26 per cent in Germany have a favourable view of the US.

Trump also chided the Germans for being "very delinquent" in their financial obligations to NATO.

“They’re at half a level, and they are very rich, they could do whatever they want, it’s not like they don’t have the money. And I called them out and said if you don’t pay I’m going to start taking our troops out,” as the crowd in Tampa cheered.

Earlier this year, President Trump announced his administration's intention to remove up to 12,000 US armed forces personnel from Germany.

“We don't want to be the suckers anymore,” the president told reporters at the White House in July. “We're reducing the force because they're not paying their bills; it's very simple.”

NATO countries have agreed to meet a defence spending target of 2 per cent GDP by 2024, but so far Germany, alongside many other alliance countries, has only reached a 1.57 per cent GDP spend.

Reacting to the administration’s plans earlier in the year, the chairman of Germany’s foreign affairs committee said that it would “weaken the Nato alliance”.

Mr Trump and Mr Biden both held rallies in the swing state of Florida on Thursday, which the president likely needs to win to have a chance of being re-elected on 3 November.

President Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in Florida in 2016 by less than two percentage points, but current polling is giving Mr Biden a lead in the state with just five days until the national election.

Just curious as to what others think about this. I've observed that there is a certain sub-set of American political thought - somewhat related to the "America First" way of thinking. It might be expressed in various ways. I've sometimes heard people say "Get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US!" Some have criticized the view as "isolationist," which may be true.

Trump said "we don't want to be suckers anymore," and this has also been part of the long-term dialogue I've heard. Some people see us as a country of suckers, where we bend over backwards to help other countries, send foreign aid, and even send our soldiers to shed their blood for the benefit of other countries. Do we (average, ordinary Americans) ever get anything in return for any of this? If not, then why should we support it?

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

I've also noticed how people criticize America for its militaristic approach to world affairs, but it's rooted in the same line of thinking that "America has a moral obligation to save the world" which is so pervasive in the American political consciousness. Without that mentality to dominate US politics, we would never have had a Cold War or hot wars in places like Korea and Vietnam. We wouldn't have troops scattered all over the world, ready to take action against any "rogue nation" deemed that way by...someone in power somewhere.

Some people say that it's "imperialism," suggesting that America's militarism and similar activities somehow benefits America, but if anyone has taken a long, hard look at the US economic situation in the past several decades, they would see that there is no indication of any "benefit" whatsoever. America has been suffering and dying because of people who think we "have a moral obligation to save the world." I'd like to see that mindset come to an end.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

It's because we don't exist in a bubble, and America is so large and has such hegemony that what happens here does impact other countries.

 

[exchemist]

Trump says US allies are 'in many ways worse than the enemy' and claims Germany preferred Obama



It wasn't clear what Trump was referring to when he said the Germans preferred Obama.



However, the article noted that in recent years, the favorability rating of the US has fallen among residents of Allied countries:



Trump also chided the Germans for being "very delinquent" in their financial obligations to NATO.







Just curious as to what others think about this. I've observed that there is a certain sub-set of American political thought - somewhat related to the "America First" way of thinking. It might be expressed in various ways. I've sometimes heard people say "Get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US!" Some have criticized the view as "isolationist," which may be true.

Trump said "we don't want to be suckers anymore," and this has also been part of the long-term dialogue I've heard. Some people see us as a country of suckers, where we bend over backwards to help other countries, send foreign aid, and even send our soldiers to shed their blood for the benefit of other countries. Do we (average, ordinary Americans) ever get anything in return for any of this? If not, then why should we support it?

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

I've also noticed how people criticize America for its militaristic approach to world affairs, but it's rooted in the same line of thinking that "America has a moral obligation to save the world" which is so pervasive in the American political consciousness. Without that mentality to dominate US politics, we would never have had a Cold War or hot wars in places like Korea and Vietnam. We wouldn't have troops scattered all over the world, ready to take action against any "rogue nation" deemed that way by...someone in power somewhere.

Some people say that it's "imperialism," suggesting that America's militarism and similar activities somehow benefits America, but if anyone has taken a long, hard look at the US economic situation in the past several decades, they would see that there is no indication of any "benefit" whatsoever. America has been suffering and dying because of people who think we "have a moral obligation to save the world." I'd like to see that mindset come to an end.

It's undeniable that the NATO countries generally do not pay what the agreement says they should. I think a bit of pressure from the US on the European countries to pay their share is perfectly justified.

As to whether NATO, as a structure, is still appropriate for the modern age, that's a tough question. The threat from Russia to Europe is still there. But Turkey doesn't really belong in it any more. And now there is an emerging threat from China towards its neighbours, in the Pacific and on the Asian land mass, which is probably far more significant for the future. So the USA could be forgiven for thinking that Europe big enough and rich enough to look after itself, these days, while it turns its attention to China - which is developing the hallmarks of an Orwellian, IT-enabled totalitarian state.

The USA came out of WW2 as the unchallenged chief defender of democracy. Looking at current events, this role is still needed in the world. But whether it will mainly be a military role in future, and whether it will be Europe-orientated, must be open to doubt.

 

[Stevicus]

It's because we don't exist in a bubble, and America is so large and has such hegemony that what happens here does impact other countries.

But that's a choice that we've made. We don't have to have such hegemony, nor do we have to impact other countries. We chose to do all this, but the question still remains: Is making that choice truly in the interests of the American people?

 

[Nimos]

It wasn't clear what Trump was referring to when he said the Germans preferred Obama.

Besides North Korea and Russia, does anyone prefer Trump, why pick on the Germans?

 

[metis]

Trump has worked to undermine NATO, which very much pleases Putin and probably Erdogan. He hates Merkel and Macron, and has recently turned on Johnson.

If Obama had done this, the Pubs would go after him with a noose [figuratively] in hand, let me tell ya.

 

[metis]

Besides North Korea and Russia, does anyone prefer Trump, why pick on the Germans?

Netanyahu, Bolsonaro, and Duterte.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I've also noticed how people criticize America for its militaristic approach to world affairs, but it's rooted in the same line of thinking that "America has a moral obligation to save the world" which is so pervasive in the American political consciousness. Without that mentality to dominate US politics, we would never have had a Cold War or hot wars in places like Korea and Vietnam. We wouldn't have troops scattered all over the world, ready to take action against any "rogue nation" deemed that way by...someone in power somewhere.

Some people say that it's "imperialism," suggesting that America's militarism and similar activities somehow benefits America, but if anyone has taken a long, hard look at the US economic situation in the past several decades, they would see that there is no indication of any "benefit" whatsoever. America has been suffering and dying because of people who think we "have a moral obligation to save the world." I'd like to see that mindset come to an end.

Now that we are over committed, we should either scale back or take over the world completely (not suggesting this). No I'm not suggesting this, but we have been in the position for over fifty years of a country that could take over the entire world! I am tired of hearing about sending our people out to fight. They belong here. Military action corrupts and ruins people internally. They don't ever get over it. With many years of action you also tend to develop merchant military people, and I don't want the US to become an exporter of merchant militias. Lets return to "Don't tread on me" status.

Diplomacy is getting awkward. Its been almost a century since WWII, and something has to change. The UN failed to unite the world. We tried it, and it hasn't worked. It was a system that we hoped would work, but systems always fail eventually.

I don't like that world leaders are concerned about our elections. This is not Ok. I'm tired of getting blamed for problems in other places. We need to shrink down our global dominance. Its time to let the sun set on the empire. This has to happen eventually. Why not now?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

For me, it's both.

I have plenty of friends and family in the US, and I care about their well-being.

At the same time, I realize that in a lot of ways, Canada is the tail being wagged by the American dog. If your economy tanks, you're taking us with you. It's in my personal interest and the interest of my country to see the US and its people thrive.

And there's also issue of human rights: human rights abuses anywhere in the world are the business of every person regardless of nationally, and the US seems to be having more than its share of them lately.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But that's a choice that we've made. We don't have to have such hegemony, nor do we have to impact other countries. We chose to do all this, but the question still remains: Is making that choice truly in the interests of the American people?

In some instances I feel it's in the best interest of the world. Such as, Pakistan has nuclear weapons and some very troubling people nearby around around. Iran getting nuclear weapons is also an issue. Better to keep a presence in the area. Withdrawing lead to clearing the way for ISIS, and is very problematic. We need to support liberal and progressive Muslims, we need to prop them up, we need to do what we can to help them win over those who would enslave and repress the world.
Ultimately, Uncle Sam got himself too deep into that mess and there is no getting out of it without very dire consequences. And in the mean time we need those liberal Muslims alive and speaking and winning minds. Because as long as extremism and radicalizing thrives in the area, the area having nuclear weapons is a potential nightmare.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Trump says US allies are 'in many ways worse than the enemy' and claims Germany preferred Obama



It wasn't clear what Trump was referring to when he said the Germans preferred Obama.



However, the article noted that in recent years, the favorability rating of the US has fallen among residents of Allied countries:



Trump also chided the Germans for being "very delinquent" in their financial obligations to NATO.







Just curious as to what others think about this. I've observed that there is a certain sub-set of American political thought - somewhat related to the "America First" way of thinking. It might be expressed in various ways. I've sometimes heard people say "Get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US!" Some have criticized the view as "isolationist," which may be true.

Trump said "we don't want to be suckers anymore," and this has also been part of the long-term dialogue I've heard. Some people see us as a country of suckers, where we bend over backwards to help other countries, send foreign aid, and even send our soldiers to shed their blood for the benefit of other countries. Do we (average, ordinary Americans) ever get anything in return for any of this? If not, then why should we support it?

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

I've also noticed how people criticize America for its militaristic approach to world affairs, but it's rooted in the same line of thinking that "America has a moral obligation to save the world" which is so pervasive in the American political consciousness. Without that mentality to dominate US politics, we would never have had a Cold War or hot wars in places like Korea and Vietnam. We wouldn't have troops scattered all over the world, ready to take action against any "rogue nation" deemed that way by...someone in power somewhere.

Some people say that it's "imperialism," suggesting that America's militarism and similar activities somehow benefits America, but if anyone has taken a long, hard look at the US economic situation in the past several decades, they would see that there is no indication of any "benefit" whatsoever. America has been suffering and dying because of people who think we "have a moral obligation to save the world." I'd like to see that mindset come to an end.

Let's see... who would benefit most from a weakened our dismantled NATO? Why, Puppet Master Putin, that guy Comrade Trump says he trusts more than our own intelligence agencies! You know, that guy from Russia - the country that was putting bounties on the heads of American soldiers who Comrade Trump refused to confront his Puppet Master about.

Nuff said.

 

[PureX]

Trump is right, in a way.

The Israelis, for example, spend many millions of dollars on the campaigns of U.S. politicians, who then support gigantic aid packages paid for by U.S. citizens, to Israel. The result of which is that Israeli children get free higher education, while U.S. children are paying hugely inflated prices for higher education. We "can't afford" to educate our own children because we have to pay for our own enormous military, and for a significant portion of Israel's military, as well. Leaving the Israelis free to send all their own kids to college.

With "allies" lie that, who needs enemies?

But you aren't going to hear Trump speak an ill word about the Israelis, because all his republican cronies are in their pockets (and so are the democrats, so don't expect Biden to utter a peep, either). So even though he's right, he isn't going to do a thing about it, but talk. And he isn't going to talk about any specifics.

 

[Eddi]

"There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them"

 

[Secret Chief]

It wasn't clear what Trump was referring to when he said the Germans preferred Obama.

Presumably preferring Obama over Trump! Obama was welcomed by crowds of well-wishers as I recall, when he visited Europe. Trump...not so much...

However, the article noted that in recent years, the favorability rating of the US has fallen among residents of Allied countries:

It goes up and down with the president (and their global activities).

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

I'm not looking (as a Brit) to benefit from America. What I would like is to be not impacted in a negative way by America. Specifically as a current major example: Without going over the whole thing in boring detail, in summary- with the UK out of the EU we are in distinct danger from the US - in things to do with economics, workers rights, food standards, our much loved public health service etc. Our PM is apparently hanging on to see if Trump wins to decide on whether to crash out with no deal with the EU.

Some people say that it's "imperialism," suggesting that America's militarism and similar activities somehow benefits America, but if anyone has taken a long, hard look at the US economic situation in the past several decades, they would see that there is no indication of any "benefit" whatsoever. America has been suffering and dying because of people who think we "have a moral obligation to save the world." I'd like to see that mindset come to an end.

My understanding is that there is much money to be made from wars. Disaster capitalism and all that. Construction contracts, obtaining or protecting resources, military "aid"...
Americans do suffer and die abroad, but then of course Americans have killed a lot of people too. This comes from a long history of American involvement in other countries, both covertly and overtly. Obviously they are not unique in doing this but the country has been more than keen to stick its nose in. Americans dying abroad comes because their government sends them abroad with weaponry to liberate countries, to bring freedom and democracy or whatever else it is sold as (the US didn't care about such concepts in WW2, until the attack on Pearl Harbour). Making the world safe for selling burgers and coke. A lot of people would like to see that mindset come to an end.

 

[Estro Felino]

As a citizen of a very loyal Nation to the United States of America, I say this:

The USA, instead of using their military forces to bring peace and to defend their allies (that is my country too), they do not mind supporting wars going on in the Middle East.
Which exacerbates those populations...and these populations discharge their anger onto Europe through massive migration waves. Not that peaceful people join these migration waves too.
Not to mention that the turmoil caused by those wars prevents Europe from maintaining good relations with all the countries surrounding Europe.

As Tulsi Gabbard said, there is one thing that the USA should do. Withdraw all troops so no American soldier will ever die in those useless wars that have nothing to do with the West.
Acknowledging that the NATO must be reformed and that Europe needs to be defended. By Europeans.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's because we don't exist in a bubble, and America is so large and has such hegemony that what happens here does impact other countries.

Thank you for saying that. I really appreciate it.

EF bows to SW

 

[Yazata]

Just curious as to what others think about this. I've observed that there is a certain sub-set of American political thought - somewhat related to the "America First" way of thinking. It might be expressed in various ways. I've sometimes heard people say "Get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US!" Some have criticized the view as "isolationist," which may be true.

I've often wondered why NATO still exists. It made great sense prior to 1990 when it was faced off against the Warsaw pact. But the Warsaw pact no longer exists. The Soviet Union no longer exists. Europe no longer faces a credible conventional military threat. (Though some parts arguably still do, like the small Baltic republics.)

So what is NATO's function in our day and age? It seems to me to largely be a way for the European Union to outsource its own military defense to the United States, at American expense.

Trump said "we don't want to be suckers anymore," and this has also been part of the long-term dialogue I've heard.

It's a legitimate point. It isn't exactly original with Trump either. I recall the Obama administration talking about a strategic "pivot" away from Europe (which is perfectly capable of defending itself against any conventional military force it currently faces... if it only had the motivation) and towards Asia and the Pacific where China is the new super-power rival taking the place of the old Soviet Union.

Some people see us as a country of suckers, where we bend over backwards to help other countries, send foreign aid, and even send our soldiers to shed their blood for the benefit of other countries. Do we (average, ordinary Americans) ever get anything in return for any of this? If not, then why should we support it?

There's another issue there alongside asymmetrical relationships with ostensible "allies". There's an evangelical missionary impulse, shared not only by "neo-conservatives" but by many ostensible "liberals" as well, that believes that the United States has a world-historical mission to spread democracy and to reshape the world in our own image. Whether they want to be reshaped or not.

It's what motivated Bush's invasion of Iraq and it's what motivated Obama's/Hillary's assisting the overthrow of tyrants in Libya and Yemen that resulted in those countries becoming failed states, the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt (where he was replaced by the Muslim Brotherhood) and their and the CIA's arming and fomenting a revolution against Assad in Syria that absolutely ruined that country and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the rise of ISIS and still failed to remove Assad.

All done with the best of motives. Overthrow the tyrant Saddam! Support the Arab Spring!! But the results have been horrific. And what did the United States and its people get from any of it? These are the kinds of mistakes that shouldn't be repeated.

I've noticed in political debates (not just here but elsewhere across the internet), a lot of non-Americans are weighing on the current election and giving us their opinions on who should lead America. Is it because they care about America and the American people so much that they want only the best for us? Or is it more rooted in how America benefits them and their country, and whoever leads America may affect matters in their own country?

I think that a lot of it is because they don't have clue. All they have is their own media which generally speaking is 24/7 Trump sux!! So they weigh in on the internet and repeat whatever they've been told. I don't take their opinions seriously.

Of course, if we ask why their media behaves as they do, you have a point. If Trump is championing an "America first" agenda, an agenda that measures America's foreign relationships by whether they are in America's interest, that might not be to the liking of the kind of countries that prosper by using us. Their interests aren't necessarily ours.

I've also noticed how people criticize America for its militaristic approach to world affairs, but it's rooted in the same line of thinking that "America has a moral obligation to save the world" which is so pervasive in the American political consciousness.

People attack the United States for its supposed "militarism" and "imperialism", but any time that people are suffering in large numbers anywhere in the world the cry goes up, "Where are the Americans?" to come and rescue them. So they treat us like sh... (brown anal extrusions) except when they think that they need us. Then we are expected to jump to it immediately. And if anything goes wrong, we are the ones blamed.

Without that mentality to dominate US politics, we would never have had a Cold War or hot wars in places like Korea and Vietnam.

Even if the US loses its evangelical mission to remake the world in its own image, it will still have national interests that it will need to defend. Supporting important allies is part of that.

I was critical of NATO up above and frankly wouldn't be unhappy to see the US leave that outmoded and increasingly parasitical alliance. But... if Europe ever faces a credible external military threat again, it will be in the US interest to aid the Europeans. The same can be said about Japan and other places, and Japan faces a much more credible threat in China. I don't think that the US can just retreat within its borders.

With the end of the Cold War, we are returning to the old "balance of power" politics and to "realpolitik". Without the Cold War, the 21st century might look more like the 19th.

Some people say that it's "imperialism," suggesting that America's militarism and similar activities somehow benefits America, but if anyone has taken a long, hard look at the US economic situation in the past several decades, they would see that there is no indication of any "benefit" whatsoever. America has been suffering and dying because of people who think we "have a moral obligation to save the world." I'd like to see that mindset come to an end.

Or at least dialed back a great deal.

 

[Augustus]

It's undeniable that the NATO countries generally do not pay what the agreement says they should. I think a bit of pressure from the US on the European countries to pay their share is perfectly justified.

What's rarely mentioned is that this was traditionally by US design. The US didn't want European nations to be militarily powerful and able to act independently, so they were incentivised to stay dependent on the US.

 

[Estro Felino]

Trump is right, in a way.

The Israelis, for example, spend many millions of dollars on the campaigns of U.S. politicians, who then support gigantic aid packages paid for by U.S. citizens, to Israel. The result of which is that Israeli children get free higher education, while U.S. children are paying hugely inflated prices for higher education. We "can't afford" to educate our own children because we have to pay for our own enormous military, and for a significant portion of Israel's military, as well. Leaving the Israelis free to send all their own kids to college.

With "allies" lie that, who needs enemies?

But you aren't going to hear Trump speak an ill word about the Israelis, because all his republican cronies are in their pockets (and so are the democrats, so don't expect Biden to utter a peep, either). So even though he's right, he isn't going to do a thing about it, but talk. And he isn't going to talk about any specifics.

All that money spent on warfare can be used for single payer universal healthcare instead.

 

[Estro Felino]

But that's a choice that we've made. We don't have to have such hegemony, nor do we have to impact other countries. We chose to do all this, but the question still remains: Is making that choice truly in the interests of the American people?

But the question is: is it tolerable young American soldiers risk their lives in useless wars that have nothing to do with the West?