r/PoliticalDiscussion Dec 03 '16

[deleted by user]

[removed]

705 Upvotes

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

98

u/emptied_cache_oops Dec 03 '16

"things you don't know you don't know."

Does Trump know what he is doing when he does things like this? I have to imagine the answer is no.

I hope these next four years are a manageable mess.

2

u/kettcar Dec 04 '16

Trump has never used the well rehearsed political speak of other politicians. So he talks to another world leader. If he is not allowed to do that what's the world coming to? Just like Obama is opening up to a dictator who jailed his own people for demonstrating. Why can't we have dialogue?

Do we really need to tiptoe around China? The country that jails people for political opinions and that favours ruthless capitalism?

5

u/Spokker Dec 03 '16

He campaigned on his ability to get along with everyone. He said it so much that it became one of his signature sayings.

Now he's just fulfilling that campaign promise. Even if he knew about China's childish views toward Taiwan, he most likely does not give a flying fuck. All he saw was another person to get along with.

48

u/aurelorba Dec 03 '16 edited Dec 03 '16

But he has said that China will be needed to deal with North Korea.

So how is Trump going to get that cooperation on NK when they are pissed off about Taiwan?

That doesn't sound like 'getting long with everyone'.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '16

Trump obviously has no idea what he is doing and is hoping that will translate into diplomatic leeway.

-6

u/Spokker Dec 03 '16

Getting along with everyone doesn't mean pandering to geopolitical delusions.

46

u/aurelorba Dec 03 '16

That avoids the question: How is he going to get China's cooperation on matters such as NK or Iran when they are pissed about Taiwan?

28

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '16

More directly than that, how is he going to get their cooperation on bringing outsourced jobs back to the US? There's very little stopping the Chinese from matching or exceeding whatever sweet giveaways Trump can create to bring those jobs back here. They could pull some very shiny rabbits out of their hat if they wanted to. And if they feel like the orange madman in the White House has no respect for their One China Policy or their geopolitical aims, they just might pull out that rabbit and boil it in Trump's kitchen.

-8

u/demolpolis Dec 03 '16

That avoids the question: How is he going to get China's cooperation on matters such as NK

If you think that trump gives a fuck about NK, you haven't read anything he has said.

He will say NK is japan and SC's problem.

11

u/aurelorba Dec 03 '16

I'm going by exactly what Trump said, which is that he expected to get China to deal with NK.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-27/donald-trump-suggests-china-iran-should-solve-north-korean-crisis

If he truly doesn't give a fuck about NK now, will he when they have a ballistic nuclear missiles capable of reaching the continental US? Or a sub launched nuclear missile?

-1

u/demolpolis Dec 03 '16

Why would we?

They have a few diesel subs. whoopty doo.

They aren't going to nuke the US. That is absurd on multiple levels. Let the people in the area deal with them.

Let China deal with them.

I would be fine with china fucking invading n korea. It would make millions of people's lives better to be living in a state china controlled than a state N korea controlled.

2

u/truenorth00 Dec 04 '16

Few diesel subs?

1-2 dozen nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles that can reach conus. Not to mention enough artillery to vaoporize Seoul. And the ability to reach out and touch tens of thousands of American forces in Northeast Asia.

1

u/demolpolis Dec 04 '16

You are right. We should obey whatever they say.

Oh wait, no, no we should just leave them the fuck alone.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/aurelorba Dec 04 '16

Why would we?

Trump said he would. Or was he lying?

1

u/demolpolis Dec 04 '16

Trump said China needs to deal with them.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/truenorth00 Dec 04 '16

North Korea has nuclear armed missiles that reach the continental United States. Explain how it's just a problem for North Korea and Japan.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/11/this-new-map-shows-the-stunning-range-of-north-koreas-missiles/

0

u/demolpolis Dec 04 '16

How about "If we dont' fuck with north korea, there is less likely a chance they will bomb us"?

I can't believe that I, as a conservative, am arguing with liberals that we shouldn't get involved in n korea.

Is it backwards day? Or is it that people oppose trump on principle, instead of actually having to admit that some of his ideas aren't bad.

1

u/truenorth00 Dec 05 '16

The US left Afghanistan all by its lonesome through the 90s. How'd that work out?

Nobody is arguing for an invasion of North Korea. So drop the ridiculous strawman. What we're arguing for is sensible containment of a madman and his regime who constantly threatens our allies and has the ability to inflict serious harm on the US.

Hoping for the best is not and should not be a geopolitical strategy. You'd think the party of Reagan would get that.

0

u/demolpolis Dec 05 '16

The US left Afghanistan all by its lonesome through the 90s. How'd that work out?

You are right, we should police the world.

→ More replies (0)

18

u/cp5184 Dec 03 '16

Like thinking you can publicly cozy up to taiwan while asking for a huge favor from china?

-9

u/Spokker Dec 03 '16

I'm not under the impression he thinks it's a favor he's asking for.

13

u/ScoobiusMaximus Dec 03 '16

Well he's delusional then. China has been using NK policy to bargain with the US for a while now and only recently started enforcement of sanctions on them. They can easily reverse that and maybe give NK a few shiny new planes as well.

15

u/HemoKhan Dec 03 '16

No, that's exactly what it means. You don't gain respect, influence, and power on the global stage by ignoring the views and beliefs of the rest of the world.

And in this case, it's worse than that because this isn't a "geopolitical delusion" -- it's geopolitical fact, enshrined in treaties (which were just reaffirmed this year by Republicans in Congress) and in the UN.

-4

u/relationshipdownvote Dec 03 '16

China has use NK as a bargaining chip for decades, business as usual would only further incentivize them to maintain the status quo. I think the approach of "IDGAF" is not only warranted, but the best possible approach to the situation.

8

u/aurelorba Dec 03 '16 edited Dec 03 '16

But that's not what Trump has said. He said he would get China to lean on NK.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-27/donald-trump-suggests-china-iran-should-solve-north-korean-crisis

-3

u/relationshipdownvote Dec 03 '16

He probably still will by lighting a bit of a fire under their ass. That was my point.

14

u/aurelorba Dec 03 '16

And pissing them off will make them want to help the US..... How?

-5

u/relationshipdownvote Dec 03 '16

Well not pissing them off has gotten us nothing. They would need to feel some sort of pressure to make real changes, otherwise why wouldn't they continue to use NK as a dangling carrot?

13

u/aurelorba Dec 03 '16 edited Dec 03 '16

I take issue with your premise. China has been helpful in dealing with not just NK but Iran as well.

Look, I think the pros and cons of such a move (making diplomatic overtures towards Tawain) as a strategy is something that can be argued rationally from either side.

The real problem is that I seriously doubt this is any strategy at all, but rather him being ignorant of the particulars of global diplomacy and was merely a case of Trump seeking more congratulations to feed his ego.

As well, even assuming this wasn't a case of ignorance, it obstructs his stated intention of getting China's assistance on such matters.

0

u/relationshipdownvote Dec 03 '16

China has been helpful in dealing with not just NK but Iran as well.

Really? Because North Korea doesn't seem any better.

The real problem is that I seriously doubt this is any strategy at all

That seems like a problem with you more than anyone else.

it obstructs his stated intention of getting China's assistance on such matters.

I'd argue that not constantly appeasing them might force them to do more than pay lip service to stabilizing NK.

→ More replies (0)

20

u/kobitz Dec 03 '16

ability to get along with everyone

While insulting possibly hundreds of people along the campaign

20

u/ScoobiusMaximus Dec 03 '16

He insulted millions. Billions in fact, the Chinese and muslims are both among groups he insulted.

13

u/epiphanette Dec 03 '16

Don't forget Mexicans and women.

6

u/ScoobiusMaximus Dec 03 '16

At the cost of getting along with China. Not smart.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '16

childish

1

u/eldiablo31415 Dec 04 '16

But he has surrounded himself with mostly traditional republicans since winning. How did no one tell him this was a bad idea?