Trump talks with a reporter about foreign policy. NBC News/Meet the Press.
In statements on TV, Donald Trump said that Iraq and Libya would have been more stable without western intervention and welcomes Russian airstrikes in Syria. NBC News. When asked if he thought that Iraq and Libya would be better off, Trump said it "wasn't even a contest". The overthrow of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi caused untold chaos in both countries according to Trump. He also claimed that ISIS was a direct result of our intervention in Iraq, as Saddam Hussein brutally cracked down on terrorism when he was in power. Trump also stated that the attack on the Benghazi consulate, which killed an ambassador and three other Americans was a direct result of our intervention in the country.
Trump was also outspoken about Syria. Trump is in favor of Russia's air campaign there, saying that Vladimir Putin is in favor of destroying ISIS, since Putin obviously does not want ISIS to strike in Russia. Though Trump is not opposed to Putin striking in Syria, he says that he still does not trust him. Trump also claims that Russia would end up in a quagmire in Syria, and compared the situation to the Soviet Union's intervention in Afghanistan.
My Comment:
We are starting to see more of what a Trump presidency would look like. It is very clear that he is worlds away from the rest of the Republican field when it comes to foreign policy. While almost everyone else in the field, with the notable exceptions of Rand Paul and Ben Carson, is in favor of war in Syria, Trump has come out against it. Though I wouldn't call Trump an anti-war candidate, he isn't a war hawk either, (except when it comes to funding the military).
I think this helps him. America is sick of war and we made it very clear a few years ago that we did not want to get involved in Syria. Obama desperately wanted to go to war there but there was bipartisan opposition to his proposed airstrikes. Though I am not sure what the current polling says, I have to imagine that with Russia in the war, support for attacking Assad has to be lower then it was even then. Being opposed to the war is a populist position, and I think that by coming out as opposed to further action in Syria, it helps Trump in the polls.
And I think Trumps is factually correct as well. It's clear to me that both Iraq and Libya are worse off today then they were before the wars that overthrew their leaders. It is also plain as day that Hussein and Gaddafi were terrible dictators who deserved their fates. Assad is just as bad, but look at what replaced the other two. Iraq is split into three countries, Iraqi, Kurdish and ISIS. They have known nothing but war since the invasion and they are not better off, though they might have been if Obama had handled the endgame a bit better. Libya is about as troubled as Iraq. They have two governments and more then a few terrorist groups running around in the country, including ISIS. I've always said that terrorism thrives on instability and it's clear to me that an attack on Assad would give ISIS an even larger opening in Syria.
He's also right about the opposition to Assad. They really do have the potential to be worse then Assad is. So many of the so called secular rebel groups have thrown their lot in with terrorist groups like ISIS and the al-Nusra front. And that includes rebels that have been trained by the United States. Those rebels, who turned over weapons and equipment to al-Nusra, were trained and vetted by our government. They were the best of the best and they betrayed us. How can we trust any of the rebels? And even if we could trust them, we have seen rebel groups that we helped get wiped out by the various terrorist factions. Al-Nusra and ISIS are partially armed by weapons they have captured from other rebel groups. In short, by supplying these so called "secular" rebels, we are essentially handing the weapons over to the enemy.
As for Russia, I think Trump is correct as well. Why shouldn't we let Putin risk his troops and reputation in Russia? The best case scenario is that he defeats or at least defangs ISIS and the other terror groups in Syria. Sure Assad will survive but Assad has never been the kind of threat that ISIS and al-Qaeda is. The worst case scenario is that ISIS or another terror group wins, which could very well happen even if we are involved in the war. But for once it won't be our soldiers dying.
Vladimir Putin has a lot riding on this intervention in Syria. Until now, he has been very popular in Russia and the Russian people supported him even as he dealt with Ukraine. From what I have seen though, the Russian people do not like this intervention in Syria. I think Trump is right. If Syria does become a high casualty quagmire for Putin, he may very well lose his iron grip on the country. Right now there isn't much opposition to Putin, but that could change if Syria turns into a disaster for Putin. Not to mention the economic costs of a war in this scale. Russia's economy has suffered greatly lately, and not just due to the intervention in the Ukraine. Economic sanctions and, crucially, the price of oil being low, has hurt their economy greatly. This new war could cost more then they can afford.
As for Trump, I'm amazed at how much I have been agreeing with him lately. When he first started I thought he was an arrogant blowhard with no real policy recommendations. I still think he is an arrogant blowhard, but I am starting to like what he is saying. Out of his officially released policy positions, I agree with two out of three. He's right about gun rights and immigration, but I'm not sure that his tax plan would work. He hasn't officially released a policy position when it comes to foreign relations, but his statements on this issue makes me think I won't have much to disagree with him there as well. I also like the fact that he hasn't gone completely insane over the planned parenthood issue. As I have said many times before, abortion is a losing issue for Republicans. Even though most of the people on the right are very passionate about the issue, the left is as well and most of the people in the center don't care. All they do by bringing it up constantly is energizing the base of both sides while both sides alienate the center. Trump isn't trying to do that and I think that is smart politically.
Still, there is a long time to go in this election and the field is still crowded. We still have more debates and more questions to ask of all the remaining candidates. I've moved Trump up to my personal "acceptable" candidates tier, but he's not the only one that is in that category. For right now I think Paul, Carson, and Rubio are in the same category, with more then a few candidates in the "maybe" tier. The only candidates of note that I have officially ruled out are Chris Christe and everyone in the Democratic field that is actually polling well.
No comments:
Post a Comment