Trump has Destroyed 80 Years of Stable Government Foreign Relations Because He Let Stephen Miller and Russel Vought Control Foreign Policy

[Nationalist]

On 3/30/2026 at 7:56 AM, John Stone said:

The U.S. foreign policy before Donald Trump was characterized by focus on multilateralism, diplomacy and international cooperation. It prioritized economic strength, alliances and a rules based international order. The strategy was to integrate rising powers responsibly while addressing challenges like terrorism, climate change, nuke proliferation and most important to the U.S. – GLOBAL ECONOMIC INSTABILITY.

 

You mean cow to the EU perhaps? So they can keep their free military umbrella and lop-sided trade practices?

Rules based international robbery more like. Globalist shit.

You Libbies addressed one thing...surrender.

 

Edited April 1 by Nationalist

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Bush, Obama, and Trump warned NATO years ago.

Dubya looked deep into Putin's eyes and was clearly wowed and Trump obviously thinks he's the bee's knees too.

Better dead than Red meant something once but now the black bleak vision Putin has for the world seems like a really good fit with the virtuous economy thingy you people subscribe to.

Whatever Obama warned about fell on on deafened ears and a hearty chorus of la la la, or America, fùck yeah...something like that.

[Legato]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Dubya looked deep into Putin's eyes and was clearly wowed and Trump obviously thinks he's the bee's knees too.

Better dead than Red meant something once but now the black bleak vision Putin has for the world seems like a really good fit with the virtuous economy thingy you people subscribe to.

Whatever Obama warned about fell on on deafened ears and a hearty chorus of la la la, or America, fùck yeah...something like that.

Keep your enemies closer, or get an equity card.

[gatomontes99]

The left is complaining about pulling down the dilapidated house and building a new one. The old system did not work. That is the point. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Legato said:

Keep your enemies closer, or get an equity card.

I bet that's exactly what Putin would say.

[bush_cheney2004]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

...Better dead than Red meant something once but now the black bleak vision Putin has for the world seems like a really good fit with the virtuous economy thingy you people subscribe to.

 

The Americans kept spending overall adjusted for inflation...NATO has been flat...Canada even less.   Putin's vision is for a Mother Russia that will not be intimidated by NATO or Chinese expansion.  The West and China can outspend Russia, but they will never out suffer Russians when push comes to shove.   

Also, NATO is only a portion of U.S. military commitments around the world.

[John Stone]

15 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

No...it may appear that way to the general public, but it was obvious that Israel and the U.S. were threatening (even more) military force if negotiations were not successful.   Iran was already attacked in 2025 (Operation Midnight Hammer).   Subsequently, three carrier battle groups and forward tanker and fighter aircraft were positioned for Iran to see.   Allies were informed for overflight rights in case of conflict, just as before.

Again, many U.S. presidents have taken military actions without Congressional approval, if only to demonstrate Executive Branch prerogative to effect foreign policy with force as back up to failed diplomacy.

 

Sure, there has been less multilateralism, but it has not been totally absent.   State Dept wonks were still trying to get a deal.   Not many pitched a fit when Iranian weapons sites were bombed in 2025.    Plus Israel has its own agency as well...and is a close U.S. ally.

Obviously there are operational security reasons for not dragging out the decisions and planning in detail for "allies" to debate ad nauseam, delay, mitigate, etc.   The U.S. and Israel have developed targeting and strike packages for Iran going back many, many years...long before Trump.

Mr. Trump announced to the Iranian people that help was "on its way" on January 13.

Shortly afterwards  a steady flow of military assets began moving into Europe and the Middle East.

The so-called, ‘armada’ included carrier strike groups, strategic platforms, along with thousands of troops

As this build-up was happening, Iran and the US began indirect nuclear negotiations in Geneva, mediated by Oman, with the aim of reaching a new deal to curb Tehran's nuclear program.

Donald Trump delivered the State of the Union address on Feb 24, 2026. It set a record for the longest speech in American history.

Throughout February, both sides met for three rounds of talks, with the third concluding on February 26.

A mediator claimed after the last meeting that there had been "significant progress",

One day later, Mr Trump gave the final go-ahead to his defence secretary for the military operation ‘Epic Fury’, inside Iran.

This war (Op Epic Fury), is a major war with global implications, and has not in any way been authorized by Congress.

Conflicts since 1945 would include Korea, Vietnam, the invasion of Grenada in 1983, the Panama invasion in 1989, the Gulf War in 1990, Somalia, the Kosovo War, the war in Afghanistan, the Iraq War (ISIS) and the Libya war.  Of these only the  Gulf War, Afghan War and Iraq (ISIS) wars were authorized by Congress.

The other wars were not, but they had a legal basis. The Korean War, for example, was not authorized by Congress - Truman argued he had U.N. authorization under the charter.

Bush’s actions in Panama – Bush argued his actions were in support of the Panama Canal Treaty.

The other wars that were fought without authorization were quite limited in scope: Grenada, Kosovo, Libya.

Kosovo was costly in money but not in American human life. The Libyan intervention was not an expensive war in either terms, of money or human life, and neither was Grenada.

Both the major wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were authorized by a vote of Congress.

In 2013, Obama considered getting involved in the Syrian civil war, and he asked for an authorizing resolution from Congress, and when Congress voted no, he chose not to act.

So Iran really is a departure here. There’s no treaty. It’s obviously a major war,  and there’s no pretense, no pretext, no initiative, no beginning of an act of a request for authorization by Congress. It is not authorized in any way.

Were the American people taken by surprise?

[Legato]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

I bet that's exactly what Putin would say.

Well you are his buddy.

[eyeball]

13 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Putin's vision is for a Mother Russia that will not be intimidated by NATO or Chinese expansion.

What NATO expansion? It's a ludicrous notion that's been as convenient to America as an excuse for all the drama as it has Putin.

Putin's vision only encompass' his and his cronies interests, like Trump's.

[bush_cheney2004]

7 hours ago, John Stone said:

The other wars that were fought without authorization were quite limited in scope: Grenada, Kosovo, Libya...

In 2013, Obama considered getting involved in the Syrian civil war, and he asked for an authorizing resolution from Congress, and when Congress voted no, he chose not to act.

 

 

Grenada was very limited....Kosovo and Libya were not limited, being 100 days and 6 months of bombing campaigns respectively.   Congress actually voted on motions to stop Obama's war against Libya, failing to pass.

Obama dropped plenty of bombs in Syria, part of about 26,000 total across seven countries to fight ISIS.

 

Quote

So Iran really is a departure here. There’s no treaty. It’s obviously a major war,  and there’s no pretense, no pretext, no initiative, no beginning of an act of a request for authorization by Congress. It is not authorized in any way.

Were the American people taken by surprise?

 

No treaty required...Iran and its proxies had already committed acts of war against U.S. and allied interests.   The War Powers Act is more focused on ground troops because of Vietnam and President Johnson...many presidents have long maintained the Executive Branch right/duty to use American military power for tactical and strategic objectives without having to always ask Congress.   Hell, Congress provides the means to do so with DoD/DoW funding each year...almost 1,000,000,000,000 dollars each year.

In the end, there is no clear boundary for presidential direction for military actions, and Trump is no different, despite many wanting to single him out...because...Trump !

Edited April 1 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

What NATO expansion? It's a ludicrous notion that's been as convenient to America as an excuse for all the drama as it has Putin.

 

Here is NATO expansion in case you missed it.   Russia has been invaded three times, twice from Europe (Germany & France).   Russian deaths played a very important role in Allied victory during WW2.   Putin reflects the Russian mindset and shared experience with the West.  Nixon understood such things.

 

[eyeball]

7 hours ago, Legato said:

Well you are his buddy.

And you are clearly a loon if that's what you really think.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Putin reflects the Russian mindset and shared experience with the West.  Nixon understood such things.

Sure, and given the growing dependency and indebtedness of Russia to China it may need to join NATO and the West in facing down China.

In any case I think a lot more will come down to whatever the oligarchies over there weigh in with. Economics trumps everything there too.

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sure, and given the growing dependency and indebtedness of Russia to China it may need to join NATO and the West in facing down China.

 

The Soviets/Russians already had a roll in the hay with China during the Cold War...did not work out well.   Going better this time now that China is the larger superpower.

 

Quote

In any case I think a lot more will come down to whatever the oligarchies over there weigh in with. Economics trumps everything there too.

 

Yep...it is universal.

[eyeball]

8 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The Soviets/Russians already had a roll in the hay with China during the Cold War...did not work out well.   Going better this time now that China is the larger superpower.

Yep...it is universal.

By choice mostly though - only punctuated by real necessity in isolated cases.

There was never any rational need for everyone to treat everything so existentially.

That they did was more a result of someone else losing their shit over something usually neither here nor there in the scheme of things.

But the waterhole is shrinking now - especially in the face of a desperate misguided need to grow as opposed to simply sustain. Sharing agreements in nature are pretty rare and in our case it'll probably have to come down to choice.

 

 

[John Stone]

13 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Grenada was very limited....Kosovo and Libya were not limited, being 100 days and 6 months of bombing campaigns respectively.   Congress actually voted on motions to stop Obama's war against Libya, failing to pass.

Obama dropped plenty of bombs in Syria, part of about 26,000 total across seven countries to fight ISIS.

 

 

No treaty required...Iran and its proxies had already committed acts of war against U.S. and allied interests.   The War Powers Act is more focused on ground troops because of Vietnam and President Johnson...many presidents have long maintained the Executive Branch right/duty to use American military power for tactical and strategic objectives without having to always ask Congress.   Hell, Congress provides the means to do so with DoD/DoW funding each year...almost 1,000,000,000,000 dollars each year.

In the end, there is no clear boundary for presidential direction for military actions, and Trump is no different, despite many wanting to single him out...because...Trump !

 

ah, not quite - The War Measures Act requires the President to consult with Congress before committing armed forces into hostilities and provides a framework for reporting and oversight of military engagements. It does not mandate a declaration of war but rather a process for Congress to be involved in the decision-making regarding military actions. 

Congress is MIA. 

Edited April 2 by John Stone

[bush_cheney2004]

10 minutes ago, John Stone said:

 

ah, not quite - The War Measures Act requires the President to consult with Congress before committing armed forces into hostilities and provides a framework for reporting and oversight of military engagements. It does not mandate a declaration of war but rather a process for Congress to be involved in the decision-making regarding military actions. 

Congress is MIA. 

 

That's fine, but in practice, presidents have consistently challenged the constitutional validity, with an emphasis on ground troops, not air or naval power.  Congress is certainly MIA, just like before.

[John Stone]

29 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

That's fine, but in practice, presidents have consistently challenged the constitutional validity, with an emphasis on ground troops, not air or naval power.  Congress is certainly MIA, just like before.

There is over 10K ground troops deployed? 

My god, man - the US reportedly(?) has hit over 30K ground targets. 

I think ur reaching. 

This 'war' is a constitutional crisis  - and it could become more so.

 

Edited April 2 by John Stone

[John Johnston]

3 minutes ago, John Stone said:

There is over 10K ground troops deployed? 

My god, man - the US reportedly(?) has hit over 30K ground targets. 

I think ur reaching. 

This 'war' is a constitutional crisis  - and it could become more so.

 

Trump will cut and run. It's what he does. Doubt there will be any troops on the ground. Realistically they would need several hundred thousand. And they don't have it. But, Trump is a very stupid man, so maybe... 

[John Stone]

4 minutes ago, John Johnston said:

Trump will cut and run. It's what he does. Doubt there will be any troops on the ground. Realistically they would need several hundred thousand. And they don't have it. But, Trump is a very stupid man, so maybe... 

The guy is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over his skiis .......... 

Bride him with the Nobel is necessary - but I for one will breathe a sigh of relief if he does claim victory and GTFO. 

, vindictive, childish in speech and action - Mr President, don't let the door hit you on the A$$  

[John Johnston]

18 minutes ago, John Stone said:

The guy is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over his skiis .......... 

Bride him with the Nobel is necessary - but I for one will breathe a sigh of relief if he does claim victory and GTFO. 

, vindictive, childish in speech and action - Mr President, don't let the door hit you on the A$$  

Lol. Yep. In a nutshell. 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

There is over 10K ground troops deployed? 

My god, man - the US reportedly(?) has hit over 30K ground targets. 

I think ur reaching. 

This 'war' is a constitutional crisis  - and it could become more so.

 

 

...and I think you are overreacting.   Not nearly enough KIAs and body bags yet for that kind of constitutional panic.   Hell, Reagan lost more "ground troops" in a peacekeeping mission (1983 Beirut barracks bombing).

[John Stone]

23 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

...and I think you are overreacting.   Not nearly enough KIAs and body bags yet for that kind of constitutional panic.   Hell, Reagan lost more "ground troops" in a peacekeeping mission (1983 Beirut barracks bombing).

This is nonsense - huge mistake comparing Reagan  to  Trump - hell, Ronny is likely turning in his grave. 

Forgive me for saying u sound like a civilian. 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

This is nonsense - huge mistake comparing Reagan  to  Trump - hell, Ronny is likely turning in his grave. 

Forgive me for saying u sound like a civilian. 

 

I am a civilian...now.   Lost several military colleagues back in the early 1980's because of what happened in Lebanon.   Trump has a long way to go compared to that.

[John Stone]

3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

I am a civilian...now.   Lost several military colleagues back in the early 1980's because of what happened in Lebanon.   Trump has a long way to go compared to that.

"Trump has a long way to go compared to that"

............ arguably what is pathetically sad is that he has lost his ability to lie effectively - 'the king  has no clothes'

Any leader that can't be believed (trusted?) - can't lead effectively.