Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy
They didn't want a woman as president.
|
Specifically, they didn't want a black woman as president ...
---------- Post added at 14:14 ---------- Previous post was at 14:04 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
Thank goodness the US is getting a Republican administration. Now we can crack on with signing that trade deal which Biden's been withholding from us.  |
What is more likely is the stifling of growth and the price rises from the new tariffs he has promised .. unless he was lying of course
I am confident that the Trump supporters here in the UK would welcome this together with the further tax rises to pay for increased military spending required to counter Trump's withdrawal of US support for NATO, Ukraine, etc.
From today's
Spectator:
Quote:
Nato should be worried about Donald Trump
Let us read the Trump runes for a moment. In February, he said he would ‘encourage [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want’ to Nato members who ‘didn’t pay’ and are ‘delinquent’. He has also said he would end the war in Ukraine ‘in 24 hours’, and his vice-presidential running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, hinted at a ‘peace’ plan which would confirm Russia’s current military gains and ban Ukraine from joining the alliance. In 2020, the Trump administration announced plans to cut troop numbers in Europe by 25 per cent.
In a similar vein, Trump said in July that Taiwan ‘should pay us for defence’, musing that the country ‘took all of our chip business’ and ‘doesn’t give us anything’. Asked in a Bloomberg interview if the United States under his presidency would defend Taiwan against aggression from China, Trump left little room for doubt:
Taiwan is 9,500 miles away. It’s 68 miles away from China… that’s the apple of President Xi’s eye, he was a very good friend of mine until Covid… Taiwan took our chip business from us… I don’t think we’re any different from an insurance policy. Why? Why are we doing this?
We must be realistic here. Donald Trump has strongly indicated or stated that he would not defend ‘delinquent’ Nato allies, Ukraine or Taiwan against aggression, sees international commitments mainly as a financial drain and would like to reduce America’s overseas military deployments. Joining these dots is hardly a challenge. A second Trump administration is likely to reduce its contribution to Nato substantially, which will have a very serious effect on the alliance’s capabilities, not only in overall quantum but also in areas like intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, air-to-air refuelling, ballistic missile defence, and airborne electromagnetic war.
It remains to be seen whether the United States simply begins to disengage, which would be serious enough, or whether the incoming president actively tries to reduce Nato’s activities. Whatever happens, the secretary general, Mark Rutte, and the alliance’s heads of government need to move fast, think creatively – and spend more.
|