logoalt Hacker News

throwaw12yesterday at 11:13 PM2 repliesview on HN

red team was against endless wars in Middle East, red team specifically elected Trump to be America first and to stop all wars.

if it was indeed about domestic policies, why promises were not held given to the "team"?


Replies

dmixtoday at 3:05 AM

Even back in 2016 when Trump criticized prior wars he always said he would have done it better and without warning. Not exactly a pacifist position.

> Trump was not a conventional anti-war candidate. His message was a variation of the “peace through strength” ideology of the right, plus Richard Nixon’s “madman theory”: a belief that the more other countries fear the retribution of the United States, the less likely war would be. - The Nation

If anything he's anti-invasion because he doesn't actually care about the countries, he only cares about American interests which is projecting power, scaring off adversaries, and isolationism.

ajrossyesterday at 11:22 PM

Sorry, no. The republican party of the last three-quarter-century has been consistently and reliably pro-American-exceptionalism. That the republican power structures backed a candidate who claimed not to believe these things is interesting, but it happened because they believed, CORRECTLY, that he was lying about this.[1]

There has been no significant realignment of US geopolitical positioning between the parties, nor should you expect there to have been. That you thought there was is, to be blunt, on you. You followed a charlatan and got burned. You should have known better after you got burned the first time.

[1] Again, hardly surprising. He lies about everything.