Author Topic: Patrick J. Buchanans weekly columns  (Read 16758 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RomanCatholic1953

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5389
  • Reputation: +1985/-35
  • Gender: Male
Re: Patrick J. Buchanans weekly columns
« Reply #195 on: June 12, 2018, 10:35:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Behind Trump’s Exasperation
    Tuesday - June 12, 2018 at 4:20 am


    Votes: 5.00 Stars!
    Share Pat's Columns!

    By Patrick J. Buchanan
    At the G-7 summit in Canada, President Donald Trump described America as “the piggy bank that everybody is robbing.”
    After he left Quebec, his director of Trade and Industrial Policy, Peter Navarro, added a few parting words for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau:
    “There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. … And that’s … what weak, dishonest Justin Trudeau did. And that comes right from Air Force One.”
    In Singapore, Trump tweeted more about that piggy bank.
    “Why should I, as President of the United States, allow countries to continue to make Massive Trade Surpluses, as they have for decades … (while) the U.S. pays close to the entire cost of NATO-protecting many of these same countries that rip us off on Trade?”
    To understand what drives Trump, and explains his exasperation and anger, these remarks are a good place to begin.
    Our elites see America as an “indispensable nation,” the premier world power whose ordained duty it is to defend democracy, stand up to dictators and aggressors, and uphold a liberal world order.
    They see U.S. wealth and power as splendid tools that fate has given them to shape the future of the planet.

    Trump sees America as a nation being milked by allies who free ride on our defense effort, as they engage in trade practices that prosper their own peoples at America’s expense.
    Where our elites live to play masters of the universe, Trump sees a world laughing behind America’s back, while allies exploit our magnanimity and idealism for their own national ends.
    The numbers are impossible to refute and hard to explain.
    Last year, the EU had a $151 billion trade surplus with the U.S. China ran a $376 billion trade surplus with the U.S., the largest in history. The world sold us $796 billion more in goods than we sold to the world.
    A nation that spends more than it takes in from taxes, and consumes more of the world’s goods than it produces itself for export, year in and year out, is a nation on the way down.
    We are emulating our British cousins of the 19th century.
    Trump understands that this situation is not sustainable. His strength is that the people are still with him on putting America first.
    Yet he faces some serious obstacles.
    What is his strategy for turning a $796 billion trade deficit into a surplus? Is he prepared to impose the tariffs and import restrictions that would be required to turn America from the greatest trade-deficit nation in history to a trade-surplus nation, as we were up until the mid-1970s?
    Americans are indeed carrying the lion’s share of the load of the defense of the West, and of fighting the terrorists and radical Islamists of the Middle East, and of protecting South Korea and Japan.
    But if our NATO and Asian allies refuse to make the increases in defense he demands, is Trump really willing to cancel our treaty commitments, walk away from our war guarantees, and let these nations face Russia and China on their own? Could he cut that umbilical cord?
    Ike’s Secretary of State John Foster Dulles spoke of conducting an “agonizing reappraisal” of U.S. commitments to defend NATO allies, if they did not contribute more money and troops.
    Dulles died in 1959, and that reappraisal, threatened 60 years ago, never happened. Indeed, when the Cold War ended, out NATO allies cut defense spending again. Yet we are still subsidizing NATO in Europe and have taken on new allies since the Soviet Empire fell.
    If Europe refuses to invest the money in defense Trump demands, or accept the tariffs America needs to reduce and erase its trade deficits, what does he do? Is he prepared to shut U.S. bases and pull U.S. troops out of the Baltic republics, Poland and Germany, and let the Europeans face Vladimir Putin and Russia themselves?
    This is not an academic question. For the crunch that was inevitable when Trump was elected seems at hand.
    He promised to negotiate with Putin and improve relations with Russia. He promised to force our NATO allies to undertake more of their own defense. He pledged to get out and stay out of Mideast wars, and begin to slash the trade deficits that we have run with the world.
    And that’s what America voted for.
    Now, after 500 days, he faces formidable opposition to these defining goals of his campaign, even within his own party.
    Putin remains a pariah on Capitol Hill. Our allies are rejecting the tariffs Trump has imposed and threatening retaliation. Free trade Republicans reject tariffs that might raise the cost of the items U.S. companies makes abroad and then ships back to the United States.
    The decisive battles between Trumpian nationalism and globalism remain ahead of us. Trump’s critical tests have yet to come.
    And our exasperated president senses this.

    Photo Source: Gage Skidmore


    Share Pat's Columns!

    http://buchanan.org/blog/behind-trumps-exasperation-129460

    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5389
    • Reputation: +1985/-35
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Patrick J. Buchanans weekly columns
    « Reply #196 on: June 15, 2018, 09:42:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  

    Trump’s Bold Historic Gamble
    Friday - June 15, 2018 at 2:49 am


    Votes: 5.00 Stars!
    Share Pat's Columns!
    By Patrick J. Buchanan
    President Donald Trump appears to belong to what might be called the Benjamin Disraeli school of diplomacy.
    The British prime minister once counseled, “Everyone likes flattery; and when you come to Royalty you should lay it on with a trowel.”
    At his Singapore summit, Trump smartly saluted a North Korean general and then lavished praise on Kim Jong Un as a “strong guy” with a “good personality” and a “great negotiator.” “He’s funny, and … very, very smart … and a very strategic kind of a guy. … His country does love him.”
    Predictably, Trump is being scourged for this.
    Yet, during his trip to Peking in 1972, Richard Nixon did not confront Chairman Mao on his history of massacres and murder, though Nixon’s visit came in the midst of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, a nationwide pogrom.
    Nor did Churchill or FDR at their wartime summits confront their ally Stalin for his legendary crimes against humanity. Both gushed over “Uncle Joe.”
    Still, if the Trump-Kim camaraderie goes south and the crisis of 2017, when war seemed possible, returns, Trump, as he concedes, will be charged with naivety for having placed his trust in such a tyrant.

    Yet, to Trump’s credit, we are surely at a better place than we were a year ago when Kim was testing hydrogen bombs and ICBMs, and he and Trump were trading threats and insults in what seemed the prelude to a new Korean War.
    Whatever one may think of his diplomacy, Trump has, for now, lifted the specter of nuclear war from the Korean peninsula and begun a negotiating process that could lead to tolerable coexistence.
    The central questions to emerge from the summit are these: What does Kim want, and what is he willing to pay for it?
    Transparently, he does not want a war with the United States. That black cloud has passed over. Second, Kim and North Korea have emerged from their isolation in as dramatic a fashion as did Mao’s China in 1972.
    In 2018, the North was invited to the Seoul Olympics. Kim met twice with South Korea’s president and twice with China’s Xi Jinping. Vladimir Putin’s foreign minister stopped by. And Kim had a face-to-face summit with a U.S. president, something his grandfather and father never came close to achieving.
    It is unlikely Kim will be retreating back into the cloisters of the Hermit Kingdom after being courted by the world’s foremost powers.
    What does Trump have on offer to induce Kim to end the lifetime of hostility? It is a long menu of what Kim can expect if he will surrender his nuclear weapons and dismantle the factories and facilities that produce them.
    Among the benefits proffered: recognition of his dynasty and U.S. security guarantees, an end of sanctions, foreign investment, a peace treaty signed by the United States to replace the 65-year-old armistice and the eventual withdrawal of U.S. forces from the Korean peninsula.
    Trump has already attended to one of Kim’s complaints. The joint military exercises we have conducted annually with South Korea for decades have been declared by Trump to be “war games” and “very provocative” and have been suspended.
    What is being asked of Kim in return?
    He must provide an inventory of all nuclear weapons and where they are hidden, surrender them all, dismantle his plutonium and uranium production plants, and shut down his testing sites, all under the watch of U.S.-approved inspectors.
    He must renounce any and all nuclear weapons forever, and accept a regime of international inspections that would guarantee he never cheats on that commitment.
    Here is where the crunch comes. Kim is being told that he must give up the weapons whose very possession by him are the reason why the world powers are paying him heed.
    As leader of a country with a per capita income smaller than Haiti’s, Kim is being told he must surrender the weapons that placed him and North Korea in the world’s most exclusive club, to which only eight other nations belong: the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France, India, Pakistan and Israel.
    Will Kim, whose nuclear weapons have enabled him to strut on the world stage and trade insults with the president of the United States, give them up to become the leader of a poor backward nation, with half the population of South Korea and not even 4 percent of the economy of the South?
    Will he give up his most reliable deterrent against an attack by the United States or China?
    In the Kim-Trump relationship, this is where the rubber meets the road. Kim has seen how Americans treat nations — like Gadhafi’s Libya, Saddam’s Iraq, and Iran — that decline to develop or surrender the kind of weapons his country took decades to plan, test, produce and deploy.
    Should Kim give up his nukes, what U.S. president would fly halfway around the world to meet him one-to-one?
    Hence the crucial question: Will he ever really give them up?
    Share Pat's Columns!

    http://buchanan.org/blog/trumps-bold-historic-gamble-129476



    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5389
    • Reputation: +1985/-35
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Patrick J. Buchanans weekly columns
    « Reply #197 on: Yesterday at 12:36:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  19 June 2018
    Trump and the Invasion of the West
    Tuesday - June 19, 2018 at 10:29 am


    Votes: 5.00 Stars!
    Share Pat's Columns!

    By Patrick J. Buchanan
    “It is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart,” says former first lady Laura Bush of the Trump administration policy of “zero tolerance,” under which the children of illegal migrants are being detained apart from their parents.
    “Disgraceful,” adds Dr. Franklin Graham.
    “We need to be … a country that governs with a heart,” says first lady Melania Trump. “No one likes this policy,” says White House aide Kellyanne Conway, even “the president wants this to end.”
    And so it shall — given the universal denunciations and photos of sobbing children being pulled from parents. Yet striking down the policy will leave America’s immigration crisis still unresolved.
    Consider. Since 2016, some 110,000 children have entered the U.S. illegally and been released, along with 200,000 Central American families caught sneaking across the border.
    Reflecting its frustration, the White House press office declared:
    “We can’t deport them, we can’t separate them, we can’t detain them, we can’t prosecute them. What (the Democrats) want is a radical open-border policy that lets everyone out into the interior of this country with virtually no documentation whatsoever.”
    Where many Americans see illegal intruders, Democrats see future voters.
    And with 11,000 kids of illegal immigrants in custody and 250 more arriving every day, we could have 30,000 in custody by summer’s end.
    The existential question, however, thus remains: How does the West, America included, stop the flood tide of migrants before it alters forever the political and demographic character of our nations and our civilization?
    The U.S. Hispanic population, already estimated at nearly 60 million, is predicted to exceed 100 million by 2050, just 32 years away.
    And Europe’s southern border is more imperiled than ours.
    A week ago, the new populist regime in Rome refused to allow a boat full of migrants from Libya to land in Sicily. Malta also turned them away. After a voyage of almost a week and 1,000 miles, 630 migrants were landed in Valencia, Spain.
    Why did Italy reject them? Under EU law, migrants apply for asylum in the country where they first enter Europe. This burdens Italy and Greece where the asylum-seekers have been arriving for years.
    Of the landing in Spain, Italy’s interior minister Matteo Salvini, a leader of the populist League party, chortled:
    “I thank the Spanish government. I hope they take in the other 66,629 refugees (inside Italy). We will not be offended if the French follow the Spanish, the Portuguese and Maltese, we will be the happiest people on earth.”
    If the migrants boats of the Med are redirected to Spanish ports, one suspects that the Spanish people will soon become as unwelcoming as many other peoples in Europe.
    And Trump is not backing down. Monday he tweeted:
    “The people of Germany are turning against their leadership as migration is rocking the already tenuous Berlin coalition. Crime in Germany is way up. Big mistake made all over Europe in allowing millions of people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture!”
    Whatever European leaders may think of him, many Europeans are moving in Trump’s direction, toward more restrictions on immigration.
    In Germany, a political crisis is percolating. The Bavarian-based CSU, longtime coalition partner of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s CDU, is now talking divorce if Merkel does not toughen German policy.
    Merkel has never fully recovered from the nationalist backlash against the million migrants she allowed in from Syria’s civil war. A New Year’s Eve rampage in Cologne, featuring wilding attacks on German girls by Arabs and Muslims, cost her dearly.
    Among the reasons Bavarians are pulling away from Berlin is that, being in the south of Germany, Bavaria is a primary point of entry.
    Virtually every one of the populist parties of Europe, especially of the right, have arisen to contest or to seize power by riding the issue of mass migration from Africa and the Middle East.
    Yet the progressives adamantly refuse to act, apparently paralyzed by a belief that restricting the free movement of peoples from foreign lands violates one of the great commandments of liberal democracy.
    We are truly dealing here with an ideology of Western suicide.
    If Europe does not act, its future is predictable.
    The population of Africa, right across the Med, is anticipated to climb to 2.5 billion by midcentury. And by 2100, Africa will be home half of all the people of the planet.
    If but a tiny fraction of the African and Middle Eastern population decides to cross the Mediterranean to occupy the emptying towns and villages of an aging and dying continent, who and what will stop them?
    Trump may be on the wrong side politically and emotionally of this issue of separating migrant kids from their parents.
    But on the mega-issue — the Third World invasion of the West — he is riding the great wave of the future, if the West is to have a future.
    Share Pat's Columns!

    http://buchanan.org/blog/trump-and-the-invasion-of-the-west-129497

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16