On none of these matters have Trump’s tactics worked. The US trade deficit is unchanged. Greenland has not been sold. Ukraine has not been forced to agree a peace deal with Russia. Iran’s nuclear capability remains. The current conflict with Iran, which began after Boys’s book was completed, is the clearest evidence yet that other states have seen through Trump’s bluster and faux belligerence. Despite numerous threats of armageddon, the Iranians have not backed down, and they called Trump’s bluff because he appeared unwilling to accept the economic consequences of escalation. China has taken a similar approach to managing trade wars, forcing concessions on the export of chips while finding ways to circumvent tariffs.
[…]
The so-called realists have been bolstered in recent decades by the failure of more ambitious American strategies. Russia, China and other autocracies have not been converted to liberal democracy via capitalism, as many hoped in the years following the Cold War. The post-9/11 invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq are now acknowledged by almost everyone to have been disasters on a historic scale, undermining the US’s moral and military authority at enormous expense in terms of lives and cash. The US’s humanitarian interventions have a chequered record: they stopped Slobodan Milošević from massacring Kosovar Albanians, but failed in Somalia and Libya. The realists also argue that the conflict in Ukraine is a direct result of overreach in the 1990s and 2000s, as the US and western allies unnecessarily provoked Russia by interfering in its “sphere of interest” – though others would note that Vladimir Putin’s own imperial fantasies might have more to do with it.
I’m not a great fan of Freedman but his analysis is sometimes interesting.
President Truman also tried to buy Greenland and was rejected – however, concessions, in the form of defense commitments, have been made by the Europeans.
The major People’s Republic of China move was to try and use Mexico and Canada to dump products (sell below cost) in the United States, with the strategic intention of destroying key American industries – a strategy they have been following for many years), Mexico eventually agreed to stop this – Canada, or rather Prime Minister Carney (a servant of the International Community) decided to side with the PRC against the United States – which means that American restrictions on the People’s Republic of China will have to apply to Canada as well – by the decision of the Canadian government itself.
On the war between Mr Putin and the Ukraine – President Trump made the mistake (a common mistake) of thinking governments are motivated by the rational self interest of their countries – governments often are NOT motivated by the interests of their country (see the example of Prime Minister Carney – whose every action, whether related the United States or not, is meant to HARM Canadians) – the war does not benefit Russia or Ukraine, so peace is logical – but this logic is rejected.
The American Administration could have walked away when its peace efforts failed – but decided to continue to supply Ukraine with arms and intelligence information.
As for the Islamic Republic of Iran – its navy and air force have been largely destroyed, in return only a small number of Americans have been killed. However, President Trump appears to be unwilling to take the necessary action to destroy the regime – action that could be taken.
His objection is based on the civilian suffering that such action would cause – I think President Trump is WRONG to refuse to take the action necessary to eliminate the Islamic Republic of Iran regime.
On the ideological point that Sam Freedman makes….
Yes – neither Russia or China is “liberal” in either the old (pro liberty – say John Bright or Gladstone, or President Grover Cleveland or Senator Roscoe Conkling) sense – let alone the modern sense of the word “liberal” (which now seems to mean Frankfurt School Marxist – Third Wave Feminism, Critical Race Theory and so on).
The People’s Republic of China pays lip service to Classical Marxism (Classical Marxism – not Frankfurt School Marxism, try Third Wave Feminism or Critical Race Theory in China and you will be vivisected), but is really closer to National Socialist Germany in its politics – industry is nominally privately owned, but is at the disposal of the government with the objective of increasing the power of the PRC and destroying rival powers – such as the United States or the European countries. Of course, this does not stop the PRC backing Frankfurt School “Diversity and Inclusion” in Western nations – i.e. in nations it wishes to destroy. Doctrines that someone in China would be killed for following – the government of the PRC eagerly backs in Western nations.
The Russian government pays lib service to Russian nationalism and the Orthodox Church – but it feels fake, a Potemkin village. Perhaps Mr Putin is best understood as a crime boss (like Al Capone) – but in charge of a large country, a bit like “Killer Kane” from the old Buck Rogers cinema reels – with Killer Kane representing organized crime gangs that had become so powerful that they had become the government of Earth. However, Killer Kane did not rule over a land in a demographic crises – or make an alliance with Islam, so perhaps Killer Kane was a better option than Mr Putin.
As for the United States – the jury is still out on whether American manufacturing and farming will recover and whether the increase of Third World people seeking government benefits and public services (and willing to vote for politicians who promise to provide these things) can be stopped – let alone reversed.
It is true that President Trump has stopped the mass immigration (something that President Bush, George Walker Bush – of the Afghan and Iraq wars – said was impossible), but the hostile populations that have entered the United States (and, to be fair to them, they were encouraged-to-enter-the-United-States – by the traitor government and the rest of the traitor establishment) are continuing to increase their numbers – via births.
If (if) present trends continue – both Americans and historic European populations will end up, eventually, outnumbered – and then eliminated. Their own lack of births being a large part of the problem.
As for “one hopes that a Democrat President would…”.
The Democratic Party in the United States is today (not in the past – but now), at best, insane – it is dominated by the Red-Green alliance, and by the vile doctrines of Critical Theory (concerning race, sexuality, “gender” and so on) – the prolonged rule of this political party would, now, end the United States and the rest of the West – as the rest of the West can not stand without the United States (it is a matter of scale – or relative size and strength).
Also Sam Freedman does not discuss the rise of Islam – which is odd as Islam is increasing in power in Western nations, including parts of the United States itself.
In this foreign and domestic policy can not be neatly divided – the struggle against Islam is both a foreign policy and a domestic policy concern.
There is nothing genetic in this – for example, Iran (Persia) was not always Islamic, and does not need to be Islamic.
And neither does Dearborn Michigan.
It is depressing that not even Mr Nigel Farage (condemned by the international establishment as “far right” – in reality he seems to be a middle of the road Thatcherite from the 1980s) seems to understand what Islam is – and, therefore, does not understand why it is necessary to oppose it – to try and convert people away from this world-view.
As for the Restore Party – it seems to be far more interested in removing Muslims from Britain, rather than converting these human beings to different ideas and beliefs.
The guy is just some OxBridge career SpAd whose opinions are just the typical bien pensant verbiage of his class and background. Not an original or informed thought to be found.
I remember his ilk back the in the 1980’s repeating the same kind of ill-informed assertions as if they were profound insights about Reagans “naïve and simple minded” foreign policy towards the Soviet Union. Among other things. With the obligatory Bedtime For Bonzo reference.
The only reason to read items like this is to gauge what the “tout le monde” in certain London Bubble chattering classes currently think. No other reason. Based on articles like this what they think is currently going on is not only wrong but well into Not Even Wrong territory. When it comes to the US. And the world in general.
Greenland has not been sold. Ukraine has not been forced to agree a peace deal with Russia. Iran’s nuclear capability remains
He forgets Trump is a salesman, not a [professional] politician.
Trump never wanted to actually buy Greenland [or conquer it], he wanted NATO to step up defense spending, and to ensure US/NATO control of the Arctic, which … seems to have more or less happened?
Ukraine has also not been conquered by Russia, nor do I recall Trump’s actual goals being “force them to agree with Putin” [for all the reflexive dur-dur about “Trump is Putin’s puppet” from the idiot-class, the idea has never been tenable].
Iran’s nuclear capacity got bombed, a lot, and seems greatly delayed and diminished, at minimum.
Does he think because Iran’s government still exists their nuclear facilities didn’t get flattened? That they have Magical Spiritual Nuke Stuff that cannot be harmed by mere physical force? Or what?
Trump’s style is ghastly, and I view him as personally a ghastly POS, as an individual, but I somehow manage to separate that from what he actually gets done better than professional “analysts”, who also seemingly cannot grasp “salesman, not politician”.
Analyze Trump as a NY Real Estate Huckster, not a politician, and he makes perfect sense.
I used to look at Trump as no better than Hitlery, in 2016; but that was before Comey came up and said that Hitlery is above the law.
At the time, I still looked at Trump as the American Berlusconi; but certainly, another Berlusconi would be better than a POTUS above the law!
Then Trump became POTUS, and his actions, and the media’s reactions, convinced me of the insanity of the journalism class, on both sides of the Atlantic. As though i needed any more convincing!
I go to his sub stack, and I see two main points: one, Trump is a disaster, and two, we’re all about to die from climate change. Enough said.
Yes, the quality of SQotD’s has been mixed.
It never ceases to amaze me that the type of people who approvingly quote Zhou Enlai’s misquote about the French Revolution (‘Its too early to say’) are often the same people that want to declare X,Y or Z has failed, often 5 minutes after something starts and certainly before it has ended, let alone had time for the dust to settle. If this crowd had been around in 1940 the Continent might well now be wearing a lot more Hugo Boss outfits.
Good comments by everyone.
Yes Jim – as you know Zhou Enlai thought he was being asked about the 1968 Paris uprising, not the 1789 Revolution.
And although President De Gaulle appeared to defeat the 1968 uprising, he was gone in a year – and replaced by the terrible President Pompidou who went along with the agenda of letting the migrants into France. De Gaulle kept them out.
If anyone wants to understand the vileness of “Modern” “Progressive” thought – look at the building that is called the Pompidou Center – designed by socialist architects and approved by a “conservative” President.
@Bobby b
I go to his sub stack, and I see two main points: one, Trump is a disaster, and two, we’re all about to die from climate change. Enough said.
Just because someone is wrong about some things does not mean they are wrong about everything. And on the flip side, which I’d apply to Trump, just because he is right about some things does not mean he is right about everything.
His foreign policy has been simply a disaster, which is a shame because it could have been a triumph. Were it not for this foolish middle east war we could have seen an expansion of the Abraham accords and peace in the middle east with the one great belligerent Iran contained in a box. After the masterful raid to take out the nuke sites, Iran was back on its heels, diminished and powerless. Instead we have the very thing he promised not to do, another unwinnable middle east war. I can forgive him for his failed promises in Ukraine because I think a lot changed there. But Iran is a disaster.
And I might add that is is possibly the biggest disaster we have ever had militarily probably even including Vietnam. Not so much intrinsically, but the political consequences of turning the government over to the Democrats at this time is an absolute disaster for humanity. We are on the edge of a technological revolution that will bring riches and abundance to all, and yet the utter morons like Bernie and the DSA are right at the point of getting power, stopping it and turning the whole thing over to China, one of the most tyrannical regimes in history. I can think of few things in modern history quite so disastrous, except perhaps the world wars.
So it isn’t that the choice to go in to Iran was intrinsically quite so disastrous, even though it was a terrible choice, it is the coincidence of timing that makes it so especially disasterous.
Trump has dealt reasonably well with immigration, and for that I give him credit. But he came to power on the three pillars of no new wars, fix the economy and solve immigration. One out of three is not a good score. And I say that as someone who was a gigantic supporter of Trump, a person who thinks that if Trump had actually done what he had promised we’d be riding a wave of success that would have put the crazy left in a box for twenty years. Hope disappointed is so much worse than cynicism proved right.
I am not that well informed on US politics, but is that really the case? I’d have thought that more DSA candidates would be good news for the Republicans. Every time I see a new one of these loons they seem more unelectable than the last one.
BTW on China, X recently announced that it had cleared 200k Chinese bots, many of which were pushing anti-data centre messaging.
No, but it affects my willingness to count them as someone I should be reading. Heck, I can do 50%.
Marius – in some cases you are correct, for example the Democrats seem to have thrown away their chance of taking a United States Senate seat in Michigan – by nominating an openly vicious person as their candidate (the voters are unlikely to vote for someone who wants to kill or enslave most of them). But the problem is that the “moderate” Democrats turn out to be disguised extremists – for example the Governor of Virginia, who presented herself as a moderate in the election campaign – but is governing as an extremist.
Fraser Orr – the Islamic Republic of Iran has been at war with the United States (and the rest of the infidel world) for 47 years – you do not understand the IRI regime, but then neither does President Trump – and neither of you really understand the basic doctrines of Islam – the core of what it is.
As for the foreign policy of President Trump – there have been successes, such as the removal of the regime in Venezuela.
But the regimes in Cuba and Iran remain – and must be destroyed.
@Marius
I’d have thought that more DSA candidates would be good news for the Republicans. Every time I see a new one of these loons they seem more unelectable than the last one.
Would that that were true. Unfortunately in American politics as in British politics the vast majority of people vote for their team, red or blue. Which isn’t to say that on the margin these things matter, but that margin is very narrow indeed. There are about a dozen or so house seats that are actually contestable, and perhaps three or four senate seats the rest are “sure things” which means that the elections happen in the primaries, and it is in the primaries that these insane loons are getting elected. But there is also a broad disquiet in the country coming from a deep dissatisfaction with Trump and the manifestations of his policies. I listened to a meme recently which seemed to sum it up. Some democrat voter said this:
“MAGA told me that if I voted for Kamala I’d get rising gas prices, rising grocery prices and war in the middle east. And I did vote for Kamala and they were totally right.”
There is consequently a rise in socialism more an more extreme among the politically active classes. You can see this in New York where an insane man became mayor, which should have toxified the whole DSA brand, but instead he has a magic touch — his endorsement is enough to get someone elected.
So, there is a large block of people, especially “swing” voters in the middle who are not voting for the DSA guys but against Trump, even though he is not on the ballot. It might be cutting off your nose to spite your face, but it is the nature of our electoral system, a choice between two utterly dreadful options, and what is one to do?
BTW on China, X recently announced that it had cleared 200k Chinese bots, many of which were pushing anti-data centre messaging.
Which brings us back to Musk, the man who can actually turn things around for America. Starmind his orbital data centers are progressing fast, and in all honesty it is the democrats hatred of him that worries me the most. When they take the reigns of power they could do a great deal to resist his agenda — an agenda that is perhaps the only thing that can rescue us from the inevitability of collapse that comes with a 40 trillion dollar debt and continued massive government overspending.
China is building data centers at a far higher pace because the are perfectly happy to build them without regard to NIMBY and power them with dirty coal plants. And it is a race to the finish where the winner takes all the spoils. Our foolish left wing nut jobs would hamstring our brave athletes racing to win for America and the world.
Horrible bad analysis. I am surprised to see this here. Some of reasoning is so bad that he could say German Armed are stronger in 1942 than in 1939 which is true to imply that they are closer to win the war which would be completely be false.
Note that everything is binary for him. Look at this pearl “Iran’s nuclear capability remains” it remains the same? does Iran have same resources for war? ballistic missiles the same?
Afeghanistan-Iraq war was significant success. It changed the battlefield from Dar al-harb to Dar al-Islam and vaccinated most Muslims against Al-Qaeda type Islam. 2 towers for 2 countries. That equation only escapes people that cant think outside traitorous western journalism.
The United States could overthrow the IRI tyranny in two weeks – but Vice President Vance does not want to do that, indeed he said in his (infamous) interview by Joe Rogan that to overthrow the IRI tyranny would lead to “90 million Iranians” fleeing (fleeing the fall of tyranny???) and becoming refugees in Europe – in short the Vice President has become a puppet of Mr Tucker Carlson – who had long pushed this line.
Without victory the midterm elections are lost, 90 million Iranians remain under vicious tyranny, and a regime that takes the words of Muhammed literally continues to seek nuclear weapons – in order to murder millions of people, and NO it does not “just” seek to murder Jews.
As for the words and actions of Muhammed – they show the utterly incorrect position of Vice President Vance (with his endless demands for talks and other delays which have thrown away the last six months) and are own Fraser Orr – on this particular point.
There has been war between the IRI and infidels for 47 years – it did not start under President Trump and can only end if the IRI regime is destroyed – the very Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran commits it to Islamic rule of the world, of the WORLD – not just of Iran. This is a principle drawn from Muhammed himself – Islamic jurisprudence (legal principle) divided the world between the House of Islam – and the House of War, and that war can only end (under the same thinking) when all the world is ruled by Islam. Do all nominal Muslims follow this – NO they do NOT. But the IRI is not controlled by nominal Muslims, it is controlled by people who actually believe in the teachings of Muhammed – who think his words and actions were correct.
Muhammed himself was happy to make peace deals with infidels – but only as a delaying tactic (and to give the infidels a false sense of security) till he was strong enough to destroy them, killing the men and taking the women as slaves.
Muhammed laid down the basic principle of Islamic jurisprudence that a peace agreement with infidels is-not-binding – it is not binding.
Therefore seeking “talks” and “deals” with them – is utterly pointless.
The same is true for Marxist regimes – such as that of Cuba.
Marxism teaches that agreements with non Marxists are-not-binding – that the only measure of morality is what benefits Marxism, that there is no morality independent of this (Muhammed taught the same thing – that moral right was whatever Allah, via his messenger Muhammed commanded, and moral wrong was whatever Allah, via his messenger Muhammed, forbad – that there was no independent moral reason by which to judge this).
It is not complicated – it really is not. And it can not be changed – as there is no one alive with the authority to change it. Only Muhammed could change Islam by claiming a new revelation from Allah – anyone, after him, who claims to have a revelation from Allah that contradicts the commands of the messenger Muhammed, is committing a capital offense under Islamic law.
“Talks” and “deals” with people who have no intention of keeping any deal, and are fanatically determined to destroy you, are pointless.
Again it is not that the people who control the IRI are not sincere – the problem is precisely that they are sincere.
@Paul Marks
The United States could overthrow the IRI tyranny in two weeks
Could it? The US military tried for many years to overthrow the tyranny in Iraq, which was much weaker than Iran and did not do so. They may have removed key power structures but it just ended up in a mess of rival tribal fighting with no-one agreeing on anything except that killing Americans was good. Plus we had the whole backing of the world. What on earth makes you think that Iran would be a walk in the park?
– but Vice President Vance does not want to do that
I don’t know if that is true or not, I’m sure he was not in favor of starting this war, in which I certainly agree. But Vance is not the President, and if you think Trump is some pushover doing what other people tell him you are very much mistaken. And if you think resistance to boots on the ground comes only from Tucker Carlson and Vice President Vance, I’d tell you this view is not at all in tune with the mood of the country.
Without victory the midterm elections are lost
The midterms were lost the moment Trump went back on his promise of no new wars, and for some reason that is beyond me (though I have a few ideas) he decided to start ANOTHER unwinnable Middle East war. We are stuck and I have no idea how to extricate ourselves from this dreadful situation. Which is to say he deserves to loose the mid terms, even though I’ll still vote for them all, because I do not fear them losing the midterms I fear the DSA and the left loonies winning it. Unfortunately it is always tweedle dee or tweedle dum.
90 million Iranians remain under vicious tyranny
If the people of Iran wish to free themselves of their tyrannical overlords they must do so themselves. Surely we Americans would be happy to equip them with weapons an intelligence to help, but it is not at all America’s responsibility to free every country from their tyrannical overlords.
And so on. I’m sure you will not agree with anything I have said, so I’m not sure there is much point in saying much more.
I’ll quote again that meme from a democrat that should leave any MAGA supporter with a hollow feeling in the pit of his stomach.
“MAGA told me that if I voted for Kamala I’d get rising gas prices, rising grocery prices and war in the middle east. And I did vote for Kamala and they were totally right.”
The Pentagon were reported last month to be asking analysts for ‘creative ideas’ on Iran. Suggests the US has bigger problems wrapping up the Iran war than JD Vance’s supposed (or Tucker Carlson’s) influence.
.
What is dreadful? you have minimal causalities and can do this forever…
@lucklucky
What is dreadful? you have minimal causalities and can do this forever…
Gas prices up 30%, inflation, destabilization of the middle east, provocation of more terror attacks, hundreds of billions of dollars of utterly wasteful spending, and far and away the worst of all, turning the reigns of power of the world’s one super power over to people who are so dangerous and clueless, especially at this time in history, that it may well lead humanity away from freedom and abundance into tyranny and poverty for reasons I have explained several times above. It is that serious, it is that dreadful.
As to minimal casualties, tell that to their mother. For sure, the risk of injury in death comes with the territory of joining the military, but we should not expend the blood of these young men and women unless we have a damn good reason, and a damn good plan for an end game. “can do this forever” is not a plan.
Fraser Orr – Islamic terror attacks are not a matter of “provocation”, they happen because that is what Muhammed taught and personally did.
Your counter argument is that “I have Muslim friends – and they are nice” – which totally misses the point. We are not talking about people who happen to have been born into Muslim families – we are talking about people who actually (sincerely) believe in the teachings and personal example of Muhammed – what he said, and what he, personally, did (repeatedly).
What is “serious” what is “dreaful” is the Islamic Republic of Iran regime – whose very Constitution commits them to Islamic rule of the world – of the world, NOT just Iran.
There will be no “freedom and abundance” under them – and the people who are “dangerous” and “clueless” are those who do not see such regimes as the IRI for what they are.
President Trump did not go back on his promise of no new wars – for this is not a new war, it is 14 centuries old in general – and in this specific case (the case of the IRI regime) it is 47 years old.
The IRI regime has killed many hundreds of Americans – and wishes to kill, or enslave, all infidels – including you Sir.
And, sadly, many of the Islamic immigrants (and their children and children’s children) to the United States believe the same basic doctrines.
There has been no serious effort to covert these people to a different world view – and without such a, sincere, conversion – “assimilation” is without meaning. Do they believe that Muhammed was a good man whose conduct should be a model for their own? That is the great question. “But they are my friends” – Muhammed taught that a Muslim may not take non Muslims for friends, so they are either not sincere – or they going against the teaching, and personal example, of the Messenger of Allah
People such as former President Bush, who rushed off to the Islamic Center in Washington D.C., only two days after the 9/11 attack, to make a speech saying how wonderful Islam was, are very much part of the problem – not part of the solution.
Did Vice President Vance say what I claim he said? Well Fraser Orr – look up the interview with Joe Rogan for yourself, and it is one of many times the Vice President has opposed victory – insisting that the tyranny in Iran must not fall (which is, basically, rooting for the other side in a time of conflict – very Tucker Carlson). Demanding talks and a deal.
However, I agree (yes agree with you Fraser Orr) that President Trump himself does not understand Islam – the trouble is, neither do you Sir.
In the case of the IRI tyranny we are not dealing with nominal Muslims, people who happen to have been born into Muslim families, we are people who sincerely believe in the teachings and personal example of Muhammed.
As for the people of Iran doing the job of overthrowing the regime themselves – they have tried, many times, and each time they have been slaughtered.
You seem to forget that they tried as recently as THIS YEAR – and were slaughtered yet again.
David Hume was wrong about this sort of thing (as he was wrong about so many things), it is not just not true that all governments rest on at least the tacit consent of the majority (and he made that claim with the deliberate intention of provoking people – because he was, in effect, claiming there was no real difference between constitutional government and despotism) – the majority may be defeated by a well organized minority, and that well organized minority may rule on the basis of violence and terror.
In such a situation only external intervention will destroy such a tyranny – indeed only external intervention will prevent it conquering other nations.
Edmund Burke called the French Revolution an “Armed Doctrine” – i.e. a doctrine that held that it was its right, indeed its moral duty, to spread to all other countries by violence – Marxism was a later “Armed Doctrine”.
But the followers of Rousseau (who, himself, was dead by the time of the French Revolution) were not the inventors of the concept of an Armed Doctrine – and Edmund Burke does not pretend they invented the idea.
He himself gives an example of an Armed Doctrine that is more than a thousand years older than than of Rousseau.
Islam – invented by Muhammed.
Muhammed was a genius – a political and military (organizational) genius.
But he was NOT a morally good man.
Muhammed was a morally bad person – I wonder how long it will be before such a statement is illegal in Britain.
As for whether the IRI regime could be destroyed – yes it could be, and it would not take long, and then you would not have had your “30% increase in fuel prices”.
But there was never any WILL to do that – the objective was always “talks” and a “deal”.
I am reminded of Vietnam – another war where victory was NEVER the objective. Victory could have been achieved – the Joint Chiefs of Staff repeatedly laid out what needed to be done – but it was NEVER the objective, a “political settlement” (i.e. defeat) was always the objective.
If you do not fight to win, if you do not fight for victory, do-not-fight-at-all.
Where I would criticize Admiral Sharp (“Strategy for Defeat”) and others, is that they never in the 1960s resigned and took their complaints public.
They kept trying to convince the political leadership to change direction – to fight-to-win. Long after it was obvious that the political leadership was never going to do that.