Trump, Project 2025, and the Monroe Doctrine

[Barquentine]

Firstly, Trump had no input into this document. He thinks the Monroe Doctrine was Marylin's physician.
This is a man described by high ranking members in his first administration as "totally ignorant and uncurious" and "breathtakingly stupid"

This is straight out of Project 2025's scheme to move the US backward.

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/trump-strategy-document-revives-monroe-doctrine-slams-europe-2025-12-05/

The National Security Strategy, which is released by every new administration...

"The National Security Strategy, released overnight, argued that the U.S. should revive the 19th century Monroe Doctrine, which declared the Western Hemisphere to be Washington's zone of influence."

Yes! Marching proudly into the 19th century!

"President Trump's foreign policy is pragmatic without being 'pragmatist,' realistic without being 'realist,' principled without being "idealistic," muscular without being 'hawkish,' and restrained without being 'dovish,'" the 29-page document says."

WTF does that mean???

..."its traditional allies in Europe face "civilizational erasure"
"...within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European."
"Some European commentators said the document echoed talking points of far-right European political parties..."

Ah... Cue the racism!

"The document also alludes to China’s growing economic clout in Latin America."

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/trump-corollory/
"Francisco Urdinez's “Economic Displacement: China and the End of US Primacy in Latin America” shows the reason China has made such significant inroads in the Americas is because of U.S. retrenchment, especially in South America."

This administration has no clue about the importance of 'Soft Power'. China does.

"That said, the very term “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine recalls the “Roosevelt Corollary” coined by President Theodore Roosevelt to justify what came to be known as U.S. “gunboat diplomacy” which led to the U.S. invasion and occupation of several Central American and Caribbean countries, including Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Nicaragua, among others."

In other words: Invade, suppress, pillage...

"Yet the economic dimension should be as much of a concern. It betrays a woefully wrongheaded understanding of the nature of Latin American economies, how they interact with the rest of the world, and what needs to be done to foster the region’s development."

Nuance? We dont need no stinking nuance!

"Nothing reflects this better than the very last sentence of the section on the Western Hemisphere, which states “we should make every effort to push out foreign companies that build infrastructure in the region.” Though the document emphasizes how significant a resilient infrastructure is for the U.S. economy, when it comes to Latin America, there is an odd guiding thread pointing in the opposite direction, seemingly determined to stop in its tracks regional infrastructure expansion if a foreign entity is building it."

Nothing I can add to that.

To be fair, the US's treatment of Central and South America is not a Trump or Republican thing. Both parties act the same. But uplifting your client states would be better economics in the long run, a win-win on trade and immigration.

P.S.: Canada's mining companies don't have the best history in the region, either.

[John Stone]

7 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

Firstly, Trump had no input into this document. He thinks the Monroe Doctrine was Marylin's physician.
This is a man described by high ranking members in his first administration as "totally ignorant and uncurious" and "breathtakingly stupid"

This is straight out of Project 2025's scheme to move the US backward.

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/trump-strategy-document-revives-monroe-doctrine-slams-europe-2025-12-05/

The National Security Strategy, which is released by every new administration...

"The National Security Strategy, released overnight, argued that the U.S. should revive the 19th century Monroe Doctrine, which declared the Western Hemisphere to be Washington's zone of influence."

Yes! Marching proudly into the 19th century!

"President Trump's foreign policy is pragmatic without being 'pragmatist,' realistic without being 'realist,' principled without being "idealistic," muscular without being 'hawkish,' and restrained without being 'dovish,'" the 29-page document says."

WTF does that mean???

..."its traditional allies in Europe face "civilizational erasure"
"...within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European."
"Some European commentators said the document echoed talking points of far-right European political parties..."

Ah... Cue the racism!

"The document also alludes to China’s growing economic clout in Latin America."

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/trump-corollory/
"Francisco Urdinez's “Economic Displacement: China and the End of US Primacy in Latin America” shows the reason China has made such significant inroads in the Americas is because of U.S. retrenchment, especially in South America."

This administration has no clue about the importance of 'Soft Power'. China does.

"That said, the very term “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine recalls the “Roosevelt Corollary” coined by President Theodore Roosevelt to justify what came to be known as U.S. “gunboat diplomacy” which led to the U.S. invasion and occupation of several Central American and Caribbean countries, including Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Nicaragua, among others."

In other words: Invade, suppress, pillage...

"Yet the economic dimension should be as much of a concern. It betrays a woefully wrongheaded understanding of the nature of Latin American economies, how they interact with the rest of the world, and what needs to be done to foster the region’s development."

Nuance? We dont need no stinking nuance!

"Nothing reflects this better than the very last sentence of the section on the Western Hemisphere, which states “we should make every effort to push out foreign companies that build infrastructure in the region.” Though the document emphasizes how significant a resilient infrastructure is for the U.S. economy, when it comes to Latin America, there is an odd guiding thread pointing in the opposite direction, seemingly determined to stop in its tracks regional infrastructure expansion if a foreign entity is building it."

Nothing I can add to that.

To be fair, the US's treatment of Central and South America is not a Trump or Republican thing. Both parties act the same. But uplifting your client states would be better economics in the long run, a win-win on trade and immigration.

P.S.: Canada's mining companies don't have the best history in the region, either.

The proposals on Panama, Canada, Greenland and the Gulf of Mexico are part of a sort of updating of the old “Monroe Doctrine” to the 21st century by Trump. lol

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

This is straight out of Project 2025's scheme to move the US backward.

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/trump-strategy-document-revives-monroe-doctrine-slams-europe-2025-12-05/

The National Security Strategy, which is released by every new administration...

"The National Security Strategy, released overnight, argued that the U.S. should revive the 19th century Monroe Doctrine, which declared the Western Hemisphere to be Washington's zone of influence."

Yes! Marching proudly into the 19th century!

"President Trump's foreign policy is pragmatic without being 'pragmatist,' realistic without being 'realist,' principled without being "idealistic," muscular without being 'hawkish,' and restrained without being 'dovish,'" the 29-page document says."

WTF does that mean???

..."its traditional allies in Europe face "civilizational erasure"
"...within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European."
"Some European commentators said the document echoed talking points of far-right European political parties..."

Ah... Cue the racism!

"The document also alludes to China’s growing economic clout in Latin America."

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/trump-corollory/
"Francisco Urdinez's “Economic Displacement: China and the End of US Primacy in Latin America” shows the reason China has made such significant inroads in the Americas is because of U.S. retrenchment, especially in South America."

This administration has no clue about the importance of 'Soft Power'. China does.

"That said, the very term “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine recalls the “Roosevelt Corollary” coined by President Theodore Roosevelt to justify what came to be known as U.S. “gunboat diplomacy” which led to the U.S. invasion and occupation of several Central American and Caribbean countries, including Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Nicaragua, among others."

In other words: Invade, suppress, pillage...

"Yet the economic dimension should be as much of a concern. It betrays a woefully wrongheaded understanding of the nature of Latin American economies, how they interact with the rest of the world, and what needs to be done to foster the region’s development."

Nuance? We dont need no stinking nuance!

"Nothing reflects this better than the very last sentence of the section on the Western Hemisphere, which states “we should make every effort to push out foreign companies that build infrastructure in the region.” Though the document emphasizes how significant a resilient infrastructure is for the U.S. economy, when it comes to Latin America, there is an odd guiding thread pointing in the opposite direction, seemingly determined to stop in its tracks regional infrastructure expansion if a foreign entity is building it."

Nothing I can add to that.

To be fair, the US's treatment of Central and South America is not a Trump or Republican thing. Both parties act the same. But uplifting your client states would be better economics in the long run, a win-win on trade and immigration.

P.S.: Canada's mining companies don't have the best history in the region, either.

I like Project 25. I also like Trump's plan. 

I get that America trashing marxists like you hate that stuff, but it's critical to the success of this country. 

Just don't be a loud mouth piece of shit fascist like Jasmine Crockett or Letitia James - those two are barely human.  

Edited December 14, 2025 by Deluge

[Barquentine]

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

I like Project 25. I also like Trump's plan.

I'm not surprised.

 

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

Just don't be a loud mouth piece of shit fascist like Jasmine Crockett or Letitia James - those two are barely human.

Care to elaborate on the hate?

[Nationalist]

IMO...

The Monroe Doctrine is the result of technology making the world smaller. Is it reasonable? Perhaps. But I am not a fan of using military to establish control of other nations. I do however think it's acceptable to blow up drug dealers.

As for this Project 25, Libbies argue that the ideals are regressive...and they're right. They are regressive. And we need to regress. 

We've mistaken "progress" for "change". Not all "change" is good. We all know that but too many refuse to acknowledge the fact.

Do we really need to normalize transexuality?

Do we really need to flood our nations with those who have historically despised us?

Do we really need to forsake our religious teachings?

Do we really need to teach our children to hate their own society and culture?

And do we really need to abandon our primary source of energy?

Change for it's own sake is not good or progress. It can easily be destructive...

As it's become now.

 

[John Stone]

19 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

IMO...

The Monroe Doctrine is the result of technology making the world smaller. Is it reasonable? Perhaps. But I am not a fan of using military to establish control of other nations. I do however think it's acceptable to blow up drug dealers.

As for this Project 25, Libbies argue that the ideals are regressive...and they're right. They are regressive. And we need to regress. 

We've mistaken "progress" for "change". Not all "change" is good. We all know that but too many refuse to acknowledge the fact.

Do we really need to normalize transexuality?

Do we really need to flood our nations with those who have historically despised us?

Do we really need to forsake our religious teachings?

Do we really need to teach our children to hate their own society and culture?

And do we really need to abandon our primary source of energy?

Change for it's own sake is not good or progress. It can easily be destructive...

As it's become now.

 

 RE: I do however think it's acceptable to blow up drug dealers..........

by extension i'd assume ur in favor of capitol punishment. 

 

I believe change is inevitable ............ the concern is the rate of change. 

If the rate of change is too great and no thought is given to the impact then standby for political revolution - Iran, 1979 is a prime example, a nod to the U.S.,  Political revolution in a Western democracy (or any democracy) is child's play given certain conditions - real or imagined. 

I really don't think Chairman Mao had great difficulty with his 'Cultural Revolution' ........... dare I mention  NK? How about Stalin's social / military reforms of the 1930's. 

[Nationalist]

10 minutes ago, John Stone said:

 RE: I do however think it's acceptable to blow up drug dealers..........

by extension i'd assume ur in favor of capitol punishment. 

 

I believe change is inevitable ............ the concern is the rate of change. 

If the rate of change is too great and no thought is given to the impact then standby for political revolution - Iran, 1979 is a prime example, a nod to the U.S.,  Political revolution in a Western democracy (or any democracy) is child's play given certain conditions - real or imagined. 

I really don't think Chairman Mao had great difficulty with his 'Cultural Revolution' ........... dare I mention  NK? How about Stalin's social / military reforms of the 1930's. 

And of these changes you cite, how many would you classify as "good"?

You're right that change is inevitable. The issue is, does a particular change produce beneficial or destructive results?

Oh...and yes...I am in favor of capital punishment. 

Edited December 15, 2025 by Nationalist

[John Stone]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

And of these changes you cite, how many would you classify as "good"?

You're right that change is inevitable. The issue is, does a particular change produce beneficial or destructive results?

beneficial  or destructive? 

likely a matter of opinion and/or circumstance

The question for political hacks is can  'change' be exploited. 

[User]

On 12/14/2025 at 5:15 AM, Barquentine said:

Ah... Cue the racism!

What you quoted wasn’t racist. 
 

 

[Deluge]

2 hours ago, Barquentine said:

1. I'm not surprised.

2. Care to elaborate on the hate?

1. I'm not surprised that you're not surprised. 

2. Care to shut up and watch an entire video for once? 

 

[Nationalist]

41 minutes ago, John Stone said:

beneficial  or destructive? 

likely a matter of opinion and/or circumstance

The question for political hacks is can  'change' be exploited. 

Well of course it can and has been.

Man tends to overreact to issues. That opens the door to deviants who take advantage of the situation at hand. The examples you've cited show that clearly. Here's another example from personal experience. 

As a young boy, I was raised in a catholic setting. We attended church semi-regularly, we gave thanks for family meals, etc... But I clearly remember wondering why we would worship a dead guy tacked to a crucifix. I've always found that macabre and rather tasteless. Eventually I moved away from strict Catholicism. But I've never forsaken my belief in God. I just dont buy a lot of the garbola that Catholics, Jews or Muslims profess about God. So...I prefer to use the term "Gawd".

The spirit of "Gawd" resides in each human. The denial of that causes strife. Mental and spiritual conflict. Psychological problems surface in the absence of the barrier to such maladies Gawd provides.

The point is...man overreacts to stimuli. Evil men use that failing to gather power. They use fear as a weapon to be inflicted on people. The common sense of true Gawdliness must reign for peace and harmony to be achieved. 

I've said this before and it'll be on my lips when I die. Every time the God of the sands of Isreal/Palestine speaks to men, people pay the price in blood. Makes one wonder...

Who has really been talking to them?

Edited December 15, 2025 by Nationalist

[John Stone]

42 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Well of course it can and has been.

Man tends to overreact to issues. That opens the door to deviants who take advantage of the situation at hand. The examples you've cited show that clearly. Here's another example from personal experience. 

As a young boy, I was raised in a catholic setting. We attended church semi-regularly, we gave thanks for family meals, etc... But I clearly remember wondering why we would worship a dead guy tacked to a crucifix. I've always found that macabre and rather tasteless. Eventually I moved away from strict Catholicism. But I've never forsaken my belief in God. I just dont buy a lot of the garbola that Catholics, Jews or Muslims profess about God. So...I prefer to use the term "Gawd".

The spirit of "Gawd" resides in each human. The denial of that causes strife. Mental and spiritual conflict. Psychological problems surface in the absence of the barrier to such maladies Gawd provides.

The point is...man overreacts to stimuli. Evil men use that failing to gather power. They use fear as a weapon to be inflicted on people. The common sense of true Gawdliness must reign for peace and harmony to be achieved. 

I've said this before and it'll be on my lips when I die. Every time the God of the sands of Isreal/Palestine speaks to men, people pay the price in blood. Makes one wonder...

Who has really been talking to them?

Good post.

I'll admit I'm not a believer. 

 I've witnessed occasions of extreme grief or personal loss where belief in a higher 'being' provides a huge degree of solace.

I  always envied those that could benefit from that solace provided. 

I think we're on the same page in our belief that faith is not about bricks and mortar, it's not about a hierarchy within said, brick and mortar. It's not about catchy phrases written  at a time when few could even read to benefit. 

Faith in a time of tragedy is often  in the form of  a soliloquy ............ which by extension is a plea or a release of great emotion.      

 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

Good post.

I'll admit I'm not a believer. 

 I've witnessed occasions of extreme grief or personal loss where belief in a higher 'being' provides a huge degree of solace.

I  always envied those that could benefit from that solace provided. 

I think we're on the same page in our belief that faith is not about bricks and mortar, it's not about a hierarchy within said, brick and mortar. It's not about catchy phrases written  at a time when few could even read to benefit. 

Faith in a time of tragedy is often  in the form of  a soliloquy ............ which by extension is a plea or a release of great emotion.      

 

You dont need to envy anyone. Believe or not, the very spark of life is Gawd. It exists within you whether you like it or not. To acknowledge that does bring one a sense of peace, but it is not a requirement. In order to completely forsake Gawd, one would have to honestly hate all life and creation. I doubt many people are capable of that.

[gatomontes99]

3 hours ago, User said:

What you quoted wasn’t racist. 
 

 

No. But that is the favored retort when the left recognizes they lost. 

[John Stone]

19 hours ago, Nationalist said:

You dont need to envy anyone. Believe or not, the very spark of life is Gawd. It exists within you whether you like it or not. To acknowledge that does bring one a sense of peace, but it is not a requirement. In order to completely forsake Gawd, one would have to honestly hate all life and creation. I doubt many people are capable of that.

........... suppose it's better to be inspired? haha

But in the situation I used, envy is the correct word ......