“Statements like these make the world dangerous and the United States less safe.”
Tonight, Donald Trump is showing that Senator Lindsey Graham’s take on Trump’s irresponsible comments on NATO can be applied to the nominee’s entire foreign policy platform. Trump’s complete lack of knowledge of foreign affairs is a danger to Americans and our allies abroad.
Trump has regularly “emotionally reacted” to terrorism activity. His facile understanding is made clear by his proposals that cut America off from the world and “bomb the sh*t out of” our enemies. Instead of outlining detailed strategies for taking on ISIS, Trump simply says “I’m good at war,” and promises that he has a “very beautiful” plan to defeat them. He falls back on the use of nuclear weapons but doesn’t even seem to know what the nuclear triad is. He wants to force our military into the use of war crimes, entirely abandoning the Geneva Convention without thought of the consequences.
At the same time he criticizes key allies, putting the “special relationship” with the United Kingdom at risk in favor of praising dictators like Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and Kim Jong-Un.
Donald Trump’s foreign policy is reactionary, volatile, naive, and very, very dangerous. His temperament alone means he fails the commander in chief test. He is a threat to our national security and cannot be allowed to step foot into the White House.
Background:
Trump Ignorant Of Foreign Affairs
Trump Did Not Know What The Term “Brexit” Meant
Trump When Asked About His Position On Brexit: “Huh?” According to Politico EU, “Brexit might be the most pressing issue in Europe, but it’s not registering with Donald Trump. The presumptive Republican nominee for U.S. president didn’t seem to understand what ‘Brexit’ meant — a British exit from the European Union — when Michael Wolff of the Hollywood Reporter probed for his stance. Brexit, your position?’ Wolff asked. ‘Huh?’ Trump responded. ‘Brexit,’ Wolff said. ‘Hmm,’ Trump said. ‘The Brits leaving the EU,’ Wolff said. ‘Oh yeah, I think they should leave,’ Trump said. Wolff wrote in the piece that Trump’s ‘lack of familiarity with one of the most pressing issues in Europe is for him no concern nor liability at all.’” [Politico, 6/1/16]
Trump Did Not Know That Iran Was Prohibited From Purchasing American Goods
Trump Said It Was “Stupid” That The U.S. Gave Iran Money In Iran Deal But Did Not Allow Iran To Spend The Money In The U.S. According to The New York Times, “[TRUMP]: They are, they are now rich, and did you notice they’re buying from everybody but the United States? They’re buying planes, they’re buying everything, they’re buying from everybody but the United States. I would never have made the deal. SANGER: Our law prevents us from selling to them, sir. TRUMP: Uh, excuse me? SANGER: Our law prevents us from selling any planes or, we still have sanctions in the U.S. that would prevent the U.S. from being able to sell that equipment. TRUMP: So, how stupid is that? We give them the money, and we now say, ‘Go buy Airbus instead of Boeing,’ right? So how stupid is that? In itself, what you just said, which is correct by the way, but would they now go and buy, you know, they bought 118 approximately, 118 Airbus planes. They didn’t buy Boeing planes, O.K.? We give them the money, and we say you can’t spend it in the United States, and create wealth and jobs in the United States. And on top of it, they didn’t, they in theory, I guess, cannot do that, you know, based on what I’ve understood. They can’t do that. It’s hard to believe. We gave them $150 billion and they can’t spend it in our country.” [New York Times, 3/26/16]
When Informed By New York Times Reporter David Sanger That U.S. Law Prohibits Selling Products To Iran, Trump Said “Uh, Excuse Me?… So, How Stupid Is That?” According to The New York Times, “[TRUMP]: They are, they are now rich, and did you notice they’re buying from everybody but the United States? They’re buying planes, they’re buying everything, they’re buying from everybody but the United States. I would never have made the deal. SANGER: Our law prevents us from selling to them, sir. TRUMP: Uh, excuse me? SANGER: Our law prevents us from selling any planes or, we still have sanctions in the U.S. that would prevent the U.S. from being able to sell that equipment. TRUMP: So, how stupid is that?” [New York Times, 3/26/16]
Trump Would Not Say Whether Or Not He Would Lift Iranian Sanctions To Allow Iranians To Purchase American Goods. According to The New York Times, “SANGER: So you would lift the domestic sanctions so they could buy American goods TRUMP: Well, I wouldn’t have given them back the money. So I wouldn’t be in that position. I would never have given them back the – that would never be a part of the negotiation. I would have never, ever given it to them, and I would’ve made a better deal than they made, without the money, and I would’ve made a better deal.[…] Right, David, so I wouldn’t talk in terms of not buying because I would’ve never, ever given them the money. Go ahead.” [New York Times, 3/26/16]
Trump Did Not Appear To Know What “Nation-Building” Was
Trump Lamented The U.S. Lack Of “Planning For The Day After,” Called For An End To “Nation-Building” In The Same Speech
Trump Lamented That The Failure Of The U.S. To “Plan For The Day After” Regarding Its Work In Syria And Libya As Contributing To The Creation Of ISIS. According to Vox, “But read that line in the full context (it’s brief, I promise you), and you see that Trump’s case on foreign policy is not much more than a remarkable mishmash of incoherence. Here he is in full: It also means we must change our foreign policy. The decision to overthrow the regime in Libya, then pushing for the overthrow of the regime in Syria, among other things, without plans for the day after, have created space for ISIS to expand and grow. These actions, along with our disastrous Iran deal, have also reduced our ability to work in partnership with our Muslim allies in the region. That is why our new goal must be to defeat Islamic terrorism, not nation-building. For instance, the last major NATO mission was Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya.” [Vox, 6/13/16]
- In The Same Statement, Trump Called For An End To Nation-Building. . According to Vox, “But read that line in the full context (it’s brief, I promise you), and you see that Trump’s case on foreign policy is not much more than a remarkable mishmash of incoherence. Here he is in full: It also means we must change our foreign policy. The decision to overthrow the regime in Libya, then pushing for the overthrow of the regime in Syria, among other things, without plans for the day after, have created space for ISIS to expand and grow. […] That is why our new goal must be to defeat Islamic terrorism, not nation-building.” [Vox, 6/13/16]
- Vox: “Planning For The Day After Is Also Known As Nation-Building.” According to Vox, “For such a short statement, there is a remarkable amount here that is wrong. […]Trump criticizes military interventions conducted ‘without plans for the day after’ but his signature idea for fighting ISIS is to ‘bomb the shit out of’ them, which is not much of a day-after plan. For that matter, planning for the day after is also known as nation building but Trump says he’s against nation building.” [Vox, 6/13/16]
Trump Said He Got Advice From Sunday News Shows, His “Very Good Brain”
[Video] Trump Said He Got His Military Advice From The Sunday News Shows. “Chuck Todd: Who do you talk to for military advice right now?Donald Trump: Well, I watch the shows. I mean, I really see a lot of great– you know, when you watch your show and all of the other shows and you have the generals and– Todd: So you do the– Trump: And you have certain people that you like.” [“Meet the Press,” NBC, 8/16/15; 150816_JF_1226_A]
Trump On His Foreign Policy Advisors, 2016: “I’m Speaking With Myself, Number One, Because I Have A Very Good Brain And I’ve Said A Lot Of Things.” According to the Washington Examiner, “Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump finally named one of his foreign policy advisers: himself. ‘I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things,’ Trump said during a telephone interview on MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ Wednesday morning.” [Washington Examiner, 3/16/16]
Trump On His Policy Advisors, 2016: “I Speak To A Lot Of People, But My Primary Consultant Is Myself.” According to the Washington Examiner, “The billionaire businessman then cited his 2000 book The America We Deserve, in which he references Osama bin Laden prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. ‘I know what I’m doing, and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people, and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are,’ Trump said. ‘But I speak to a lot of people, but my primary consultant is myself, and I have a good instinct for this stuff,’ he added.” [Washington Examiner, 3/16/16]
Trump Flip-Flopped On Whether He Would Deploy Troops To Middle East Or Not
May 2016: Trump Claimed He Would Have Stayed Out Of Syria, Libya, And Iraq
[Video] May 20, 2016: Trump Claimed He Would Have Stayed Out Of Libya, Iraq, And Syria. While appearing on MSNBC’s Morning Joe,Donald Trump said, “I would have stayed out of Libya, yeah. I would have stayed out of Iraq, too. Joe Scarborough: And would you have stayed out of Syria? Trump: I would have stayed out of Syria and I wouldn’t have fought so much for Assad…against Assad, because I thought that was a whole thing.” [Morning Joe, MSNBC, 5.20.16]
Just Two Months Earlier, Trump Had Pledged To Deploy “20,000 – 30,000” American Troops To Iraq
[Video]March 2016: Trump Called For The Deployment Of 30,000 American Soldiers To Fight ISIS In Syria And Iraq. According to Politico, “Donald Trump would deploy up to 30,000 American soldiers in the Middle East to defeat the Islamic State, he said at Thursday night’s debate. Trump was answering a question about comments from General Lloyd Austin III, the head of U.S. Central Command who said more troops on the ground would be needed to defeat ISIS in Syria and Iraq. ‘We really have no choice, we have to knock out ISIS,’ Trump said. ‘I would listen to the generals, but I’m hearing numbers of 20,000-30,000.’” [Politico, 3/10/16]
Trump Called NATO “Obsolete,” Considered Leaving It
Trump Suggested The U.S. “Get Rid Of” Nato
Trump: “NATO Is Obsolete. We’re Spending Too Much Money On NATO.” Interview. Trump: My answers are NATO is obsolete. We’re spending too much money on NATO. We’re paying the lion’s share. We’re spending tremendous amounts of money on something that was many, many decades ago. And the world has changed. It’s a different place. There’s no emphasis on terror with NATO. And frankly, if there is, you need different countries because it involves different countries. NATO is very obsolete and it should be readjusted for change and frankly other people should also bear the brunt. Why are we paying so much? [Fox News’s FOX & Friends: 160328_MM_83289_A.mp4, 3/28/16]
Trump: “NATO’s Obsolete. We Could Change It, Rejigger It, Or Frankly If We Had To, Get Rid Of It.” Interview. Trump: We need to bring back our money. We need to stop paying so much money to NATO and worry about our forces because we’re taking care of all these countries that are getting in many cases a free ride. And I’m the only one that brought it up. I brought up NATO. It’s a free ride for so many of these countries. It’s a disgusting free ride. And frankly NATO’s obsolete. We could change it, rejigger it, or frankly if we had to, get rid of it because we’re paying billions and billions of dollars to protect countries that frankly do nothing for us, and they do nothing in terms of payment. [WROK’s Newstalk: 160329_MM_83432_A.mp4, 3/29/16]
Trump On Security Umbrellas: “We Get Nothing Out Of It.” Interview. Bollig: Don’t we get something out of that too though, Donald? When we have a true presence in these foreign countries – allies, on their land – we can keep an eye on maybe some unfriendly countries that they’re adjacent to? Trump: We get nothing out of it. In my opinion, we get very, very little out of it. What they should do is at least reimburse us or reimburse us properly in a proper amount. [Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor: 160328_MM_83383_A.mp4, 3/28/16]
Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg: A Lot Of Trump’s Comments Make For An “Unstable World”
Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg: “A Lot Of What Donald Trump Says Makes For A More Unstable World.” According to Politico, “Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg hopes Donald Trump would show the world a different face if he succeeds in winning the U.S. presidency. ‘A lot of what Donald Trump says makes for a more unstable world,’ Solberg said in an interview with POLITICO. ‘I hope this is part of local election campaigning and not what he will do if he is in office. He has said on a lot of topics different things, so we will see which Donald Trump he becomes.’” [Politico, 6/15/16]
Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg: Next American President Should Understand That U.S. Is “Extremely Important” For Europe’s Security, That “We Are Their Best Friends In The World.” According to Politico, “The next American president should be someone who understands the U.S. is ‘extremely important’ for the security of Europe and that ‘we are their best friends in the world,’ the Norwegian leader said.” [Politico, 6/15/16]
Trump Falsely Claimed He Convinced NATO To Add A Terrorism Intelligence Post
Trump Claimed NATO Created A Terrorism Intelligence Position “All Because Of Me.” According to Bloomberg, “Trump said one example of his prowess in foreign policy is the fact that North Atlantic Treaty Organization created a terrorism post after he suggested it during a cable television interview in March. The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that NATO is creating a powerful new intelligence post, ‘amid growing criticism of the alliance’s failure to focus more resources on terrorism,’ including from Trump. ‘It’s all because of me,’ Trump said in the interview. ‘In all fairness, you know, it’s not my life,’ Trump said about foreign policy and national security. ‘But I know about NATO. It’s obsolete. And it doesn’t cover terrorism.’” [Bloomberg, 6/8/16]
Trump Tweet, 2016: “See, When I Said NATO Was Obsolete Because Of No Terrorism Protection, They Made The Change Without Giving Me Credit.” [Twitter- Donald J. Trump, 6/6/16]
NATO Refuted That Claim
NATO: Trump Did Not Influence NATO’s Decision To Create A New Intelligence Position. According to Politico, “Trump told Bloomberg that the creation of NATO’s new assistant secretary general for intelligence position is ‘all because of me.’ NATO disputed Trump’s claim and said the new position has no connection to the presumptive GOP nominee or any other candidate. ‘The creation of a new post of assistant secretary general for intelligence has been considered for some time, as part of our ongoing efforts to increase NATO’s readiness to deal with threats such as hybrid warfare,’ a NATO official told POLITICO. ‘So there’s no connection to any national election” [Politico, 6/8/16]
Falsely Claimed Allies Paid “Nothing” For U.S. Protection
Trump Claimed U.S. Allies Did Not Pay For U.S. Protection, Proposed Forcing Them To Do So
Trump Called For Allies To Pay U.S. For Providing Protection: “We Have To Be Reimbursed, Substantially Reimbursed, I Mean, To A Point That’s Far Greater Than What We’re Being Paid Right Now.” According to The New York Times, “[TRUMP:] And I’m trying to figure out, why is it that we aren’t going in and saying, at a minimum, at a minimum it’s a two-part question, with respect to Maggie’s question. But why aren’t we going in and saying, ‘At a minimum, I’m sorry folks, but you have to, under no circumstances can we continue to do this.’ You know, we needed, we needed oil desperately years ago. Today, because – again, because of the new technologies, and because of places that we never thought had oil, and they do have oil, and there’s a glut on the market, there’s a tremendous glut on the market, I mean you have ships out at sea that are loaded up and they don’t even know where to go dump it. But we don’t have that same pressure anymore, at all. And we shouldn’t have that for a long period of time, because there’s so many places. I mean, they’re closing wells all over the place. So, I would say this, I would say at a minimum, we have to be reimbursed, substantially reimbursed, I mean, to a point that’s far greater than what we’re being paid right now. Because we’re not being reimbursed for the kind of tremendous service that we’re performing by protecting various countries.” [New York Times, 3/26/16]
Trump Said He Was “Willing” To Withdraw U.S. Troops From South Korea, Japan If They Did Not Increase Contribution To Paying For Troops: “I Would Not Do So Happily, But I Would Be Willing To Do So.” According to The New York Times, “HABERMAN: Would you be willing to withdraw U.S. forces from places like Japan and South Korea if they don’t increase their contribution significantly? TRUMP: Yes, I would. I would not do so happily, but I would be willing to do it. Not happily. David actually asked me that question before, this morning before we sort of finalized out. The answer is not happily but the answer is yes. We cannot afford to be losing vast amounts of billions of dollars on all of this. We just can’t do it anymore. Now there was a time when we could have done it. When we started doing it. But we can’t do it anymore. And I have a feeling that they’d up the ante very much. I think they would, and if they wouldn’t I would really have to say yes.” [New York Times, 3/26/16]
Trump Called For “Money Machine” Saudi Arabia To Reimburse The U.S. For Providing Protection, Because It Would Not “Be Around” Without U.S. According to The New York Times, “Now Saudi Arabia’s one of them. I think if Saudi Arabia was without the cloak of American protection of our country’s, of U.S. protection, think of Saudi Arabia. I don’t think it would be around. It would be, whether it was internal or external, it wouldn’t be around for very long. And they’re a money machine, they’re a monetary machine, and yet they don’t reimburse us the way we should be reimbursed. So that’s a real problem.” [New York Times, 3/26/16]
[Video] Trump On NATO Allies: “Either They Pay Up, Including For Past Deficiencies, Or They Have To Get Out. And If Breaks Up NATO, It Breaks Up NATO.” Trump: Many countries are not paying their fair share. Many many, of the 28, many many countries are not paying, most of them, but many countries are not paying their fair share. That means we are protecting them and they are getting all sorts of military protection and other things. And they’re ripping off the United States. And they’re ripping you off. I don’t care. I don’t want to do that. Either they pay up, including for past deficiencies, or they have to get out. And if breaks up NATO, it breaks up NATO. [Donald Trump Rally in Racine: 160402_MKW_105_A, 4/2/16]
Trump’s Claim About Americans Overpaying For NATO Rated False
Washington Post Fact Checker: “Trump’s Claims Of The U.S. Paying A Disproportionate Share, Or ‘A Lion’s Share,’ Are Wildly Exaggerated.”According to the Washington Post’s Fact Checker, “Here’s the full breakdown for the 2016-2017 budget period. (NSIP, one of three elements listed, refers to the NATO Security Investment Program). In 2012, the Congressional Research Service produced a report that looked at direct funding in detail. Despite Trump’s claim that the United States is spending ‘billions and billions’ on NATO, Defense Department budget documents show the annual direct contribution is under $500 million a year. […] By this metric, Trump’s claims of the U.S. paying a disproportionate share, or ‘a lion’s share,’ are wildly exaggerated. The U.S. pays the most, but not significantly more than the next country — and the formula for calculating the different shares is reasonable.” [Washington Post, 3/30/16]
Washington Post Fact Checker: Trump Awarded Three Pinocchios For “Certainly False” Claim About NATO Members Paying “Virtually Nothing.” According to the Washington Post’s Fact Checker, “To sum up, Trump is simply wrong on direct funding and is imprecise and possibly out of date on indirect funding. It’s certainly false to say that most of the other NATO members pay ‘virtually nothing.’ That results in a blended rating of between Two and Three Pinocchios. We tipped toward Three because he shouldn’t make such statements if his campaign is not prepared to explain them.” [Washington Post, 3/30/16]
Trump Believed America Received No Benefit From United Nations
[Audio] Trump: “We Get Nothing From The United Nations.” Interview. Trump: And I’m going to make sure that the United Nations, which is a disaster – they never give us anything. We get nothing from the United Nations. And look at the kind of cost that that is. Either it’s going to work for us, or what’s the purpose of us making the big payment? We make the big payment. Other people, take a look at what they pay for the United Nations. Some of them pay nothing. And we always seem to be on the wrong end of the rulings. And how often is the United Nations involved in disputes? You take a look at all of these disputes all over the world, do you ever see the United Nations getting in there and solving it? It’s just a political organization for themselves. [WROK’s Newstalk: 160329_MM_83432_A.mp4, 3/29/16]
Trump’s Simplistic And Meaningless Plans For Defeating ISIS
Trump Claimed To Have Secret Plan To Defeat ISIS With Guaranteed Victory
[Video] MAY 2015: Trump Claimed To Have A Secret “Method Of Defeating [ISIS] Quickly And Effectively And Having Total Victory.” “Donald Trump: First of all, they have no respect for our president. That’s one thing for sure. And I do know what to do, and I would know how to bring ISIS to the table or, beyond that, defeat ISIS very quickly. And I’m not going to tell what you it is tonight. Greta Van Susteren: Donald? Why won’t you tell us? We need all the help we can get. We need a dialogue on this. Trump: If I run and if I win, I don’t want the enemy to know what I’m doing. I don’t want the enemy to know what I’m doing. Unfortunately I will probably have to tell at some point, but there is a method of defeating them quickly and effectively and having total victory.” [“On the Record,” Fox News, 5/27/15; 150527_JF_1230_A]
- [Video] Trump: “I Know A Way That Would Absolutely Give Us Guaranteed Victory.” “I know a way that would absolutely give us guaranteed victory. I’m going to say. I guess I’ll be forced to say it sometime, but I hate to say it because as soon as you say it they’re going to be just – it’s an idea that, in my opinion, is foolproof. I’m not talking about dropping bombs, I’m not talking about dropping the big nuke. I’m talking about something that would be unbelievable as an idea. The problem is then everybody is going to take the idea, run with it and, number one, people forget where it came from – and that’s less important – and number two, it gives the enemy – they’ll be able to protect against it. I’m going to hold that off, Simon, but at some point I’ll be forced to say it.” [Simon Conway, 6/3/15; 150603_MJL_282_A]
- [Video] Trump On His Secret Plan To Defeat ISIS: “It’s So Simple. It’s Like The Paper Clip.” Simon Conway: Let me ask you one question before I let you go. Have you run that idea past any generals, any SEALs, anybody with military experience? Donald Trump: Yes, I ran it past two or three people. They love it. It’s so simple. It’s like the paper clip. You know, somebody came up with the idea of the paper clip and made a lot of money and everybody’s saying, ‘Boy, why didn’t I think of that, it’s so simple.’ This is so simple, so surgical, it would be an unbelievable thing. Now, I’ve been around saying this, you would think somebody from the administration would at least call me and say, ‘Hey, could you tell us what it is?’ It happens to be a great idea. But at the right time, I guess I’ll give it. I hate to give it in one way because if I ran and won I’d hate like hell to have this idea – because once you give it, it really ceases to be – you lose the surprise.” [Simon Conway, 6/3/15; 150603_MJL_282_A]
Trump Described His Plans For ISIS In Simplistic And Vulgar Terms
[Video] NOVEMBER 2015: Trump On ISIS: “I Would Bomb The Shit Out Of ‘Em.” “I would bomb the shit out of ’em. I would just bomb those suckers. I’d blow up the pipes, I’d blow up the refineries, I’d blow up every single inch, there’d be nothing left.” [Donald Trump, Rally, Fort Dodge, IA,11/12/15; 151112_JF_1232_A]
2015: Trump In Ad Promised To “Quickly And Decisively Bomb The Hell Out Of ISIS.” According to the Washington Post, “In a new radio ad released Wednesday, Donald Trump accuses President Obama and other politicians of ‘losing the war on terrorism’ and promises to ‘quickly and decisively bomb the hell out of ISIS.’” [Washington Post, 11/18/15]
Trump On ISIS Oil Infrastructure, 2015: “I’d Knock The S— Out Of It.” In an interview with Business Insider, Donald Trump said, “ISIS is making a fortune with fuel, with oil. They took over some of the oil wells in Iraq and Syria. They’re making a million dollars a day, a million dollars every four or five hours. I’d knock the s— out of it. I wouldn’t wait, I’d just knock it. Now, they’re not making money.” [Business Insider, 11/19/15]
Trump On Destroying ISIS Oil Infrastructure, 2015: Exxon Would Rebuild “That F—— Thing So Fast Your Head Will Spin, OK?” In an interview with Business Insider, Donald Trump said, “ISIS is making a fortune with fuel, with oil. They took over some of the oil wells in Iraq and Syria. They’re making a million dollars a day, a million dollars every four or five hours. I’d knock the s— out of it. I wouldn’t wait, I’d just knock it. Now, they’re not making money. And people say, ‘You can’t do that’ because you wouldn’t want to rebuild the infrastructure. Well, you and I know about Exxon. They’ll build that f—— thing so fast your head will spin, OK? Knock ’em out. You knock ’em out. And they’ll go in there, and they’ll [Exxon] rebuild that in two months. You know what I’m talking about. I’ve seen these guys, the way they can build refineries, and the way they can build oil depots.” [Business Insider, 11/19/15]
Would Not Rule Out Using Nuclear Weapons Against ISIS
Trump Did Not Rule Out Using Nuclear Weapons Against ISIS. Interview. Heilemann: You would rule with the possibility of using nuclear weapons against ISIS? Trump: Well, I’m never going to rule anything out, and I wouldn’t want to say it. Even if I felt it wasn’t good, I wouldn’t want to tell you that because at a minimum, I want them to think maybe we would use them. It’s the worst thing when we do these interviews with everybody, not me, and you ask a question like that and everybody comes clean and they’re so honest. You know, we need unpredictability. The enemy. We are enemies, ISIS is a enemy and it’s a enemy not wearing uniform so we don’t even know who the enemy is. You know in the old days when I’m Japan or when I’m Germany, their soldiers would be dressed, we’d be dressed, we know who we were fighting – it was called a war. We don’t know who these people are. The fact is we need unpredictability. And when you ask a question like that, it’s a very sad thing to have to answer it because the enemy is watching. And I have a very good chance of winning. And I frankly don’t want the enemy to know how I’m thinking. But what that being said, I don’t rule out anything. [Bloomberg’s With All Due Respect: 160323_MM_83091_A.mp4, 3/23/16]
Trump: “Somebody Hits Us Within ISIS — You Wouldn’t Fight Back With A Nuke?” Town Hall. Matthews: Where would we drop — where would we drop a nuclear weapon in the Middle East? Trump: Let me explain. Let me explain. Somebody hits us within ISIS — you wouldn’t fight back with a nuke? Matthews: No. To drop a nuclear weapon on a community of people that are — Trump: No, no, but you can’t say — first of all, you don’t want to say, “Take everything off the table…” Matthews: No, just nuclear. Trump: — because you’d be a bad negotiator if you do that. Matthews: Just nuclear.Trump: Look, nuclear should be off the table. But would there be a time when it could be used, possibly, possibly? [MSNBC’s Town Hall with Donald Trump: 160330_MM_83586_B.mp4, 3/30/16]
Experts Decried Trump’s Plans
News Outlets Criticized Trump’s Foreign Policy Positions As “Dangerous” And “ignorant”
New York Times Editorial Headline: Mr. Trump’s Dangerous Babble On Foreign Policy. [Editorial- New York Times, 3/28/16]
New York Times Called Trump’s Policies On National Security “Disturbing.” In an editorial The New York Times wrote, “Donald Trump might use nuclear weapons to go after Islamic State terrorists. Or maybe not. In a recent spate of interviews, including with The Times, he was unable or unwilling to clarify his disturbing views on this and other critical national security issues, which sometimes shift from one minute to the next.” [New York Times,3/28/16]
Eugene Robinson, Washington Post Columnist, Called Trump’s “Ignorance” On U.S. Foreign Policy “Breathtaking.” In a The Washington Post op-ed Eugene Robinson wrote, “Donald Trump’s ignorance of government policy, both foreign and domestic, is breathtaking. The Republican Party is likely to nominate for president a man who appears to know next to nothing about the issues that would confront him in the job.” [Washington Post,3/24/16]
National Review Editorial: “Trump Knows Approximately As Much About National Security As He Does About The Nuclear Triad — Which Is To Say, Almost Nothing.” Accoridng to an editorial in the National Review, “On foreign policy, Trump is a nationalist at sea. Sometimes he wants to let Russia fight ISIS, and at others he wants to ‘bomb the sh**’ out of it. He is fixated on stealing Iraq’s oil and casually suggested a few weeks ago a war crime — killing terrorists’ families — as a tactic in the war on terror. For someone who wants to project strength, he has an astonishing weakness for flattery, falling for Vladimir Putin after a few coquettish bats of the eyelashes from the Russian thug. All in all, Trump knows approximately as much about national security as he does about the nuclear triad — which is to say, almost nothing.” [Editorial- Natoinal Review, 2/15/16]
Republian Foreign Policy Experts, leaders Opposed Trump’s Foreign Policy
Former CIA Director Michael Hayden Said He Would Be “Incredibly Concerned” If Trump Governed In Line With His Campaign Promises On Terrorism And Believed The U.S. Military Would Refuse To Follow An Order To Kill The Families Of Terrorists. According to The Washington Post, “Former CIA director Michael Hayden believes there is a legitimate possibility that the U.S. military would refuse to follow orders given by Donald Trump if the Republican front-runner becomes president and decides to make good on certain campaign pledges. […]’I would be incredibly concerned if a President Trump governed in a way that was consistent with the language that candidate Trump expressed during the campaign,’ Hayden said during the interview with Maher. […]During his appearance on ‘Real Time,’ Hayden cited Trump’s pledge to kill family members as being among his most troubling campaign statements. ‘That never even occurred to you, right?’ Maher asked. ‘God, no!’ Hayden replied. ‘Let me give you a punchline: If he were to order that once in government, the American armed forces would refuse to act.’” [Washington Post, 2/28/16]
Naveed Jamali Of The Foreign Policy Institute And Republican Strategist Evan Siegfriend Said Trump’s Plan On Terrorism Was “Not Based In Reality” And “Reveal His Utter Lack Of Comprehension Of The Important Issues, Especially National Security.” In a Business Insider op-ed Evan Siegfried and Naveed Jamali wrote, “Trump’s idea of how to combat terrorism and ISIS is not based in reality. It unconstitutionally targets an entire religion, while pushing policies that actually make America less safe. We can ill afford to engage in policies that make our allies less likely to work with us and prevent future terror attacks. Nor can we fight terrorism with an approach that creates more terrorists and resentment of the US. What should be frightening is how Trump’s record and ‘plan’ reveal his utter lack of comprehension of the important issues, especially national security. We cannot place the safety of the US in the hands of someone who cannot comprehend or understand the threat and how to deal with it.” [Evan Siegfried and Naveed Jamali- Business Insider, 3/22/16]
121 Republican National Security Experts Expressed “Opposition To A Donald Trump Presidency” Due To His Ideas On Foreign Policy That Would “Make America Less Safe.” In an open letter, Republican national security experts wrote, “We the undersigned, members of the Republican national security community, represent a broad spectrum of opinion on America’s role in the world and what is necessary to keep us safe and prosperous. We have disagreed with one another on many issues, including the Iraq war and intervention in Syria. But we are united in our opposition to a Donald Trump presidency. Recognizing as we do, the conditions in American politics that have contributed to his popularity, we nonetheless are obligated to state our core objections clearly: […]His embrace of the expansive use of torture is inexcusable. […]Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world. Furthermore, his expansive view of how presidential power should be wielded against his detractors poses a distinct threat to civil liberty in the United States. Therefore, as committed and loyal Republicans, we are unable to support a Party ticket with Mr. Trump at its head. We commit ourselves to working energetically to prevent the election of someone so utterly unfitted to the office.” [War On The Rocks, 3/2/16]
Al-Qaeda Affiliate Al-Shabaab Used Trump’s Proposed Muslim Ban In Terrorist Recruitment Video
2015: Terrorist Group Al-Shabaab Released Recruitment Video Featuring Trump’s Call For “Shutdown” Of Muslims Entering United States.According to ABC News, “The militant group Al-Shabaab — Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Somalia — has released a recruitment video featuring GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. The more-than 51-minute propaganda video comes on the heels of a war of words between Trump and Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton over her suggestion that the real estate mogul’s controversial remarks about Muslims would be used to recruit jihadis. The video includes a clip of Trump calling for a ‘shutdown’ of Muslims entering the United States. ‘Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the [bleep] is going on,’ Trump says in the clip. The group bleeps out Trump’s use of the word ‘hell.’” [ABC News, 1/1/16]
- Al-Shabaab Is Al Qaeda’s Affiliate In Somalia. According to ABC News, “The militant group Al-Shabaab — Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Somalia — has released a recruitment video featuring GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. The more-than 51-minute propaganda video comes on the heels of a war of words between Trump and Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton over her suggestion that the real estate mogul’s controversial remarks about Muslims would be used to recruit jihadis. The video includes a clip of Trump calling for a ‘shutdown’ of Muslims entering the United States. ‘Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the [bleep] is going on,’ Trump says in the clip. The group bleeps out Trump’s use of the word ‘hell.’” [ABC News, 1/1/16]
2016: Al-Shabaab Recruitment Video Featuring Trump Warned Against Increased Violence Against American Muslims By Racist Americans.According to CNN, “An al Qaeda affiliate has apparently released a new recruitment video, telling Muslims in America that the country has a long history of racism and discrimination and will turn on its Muslim community. The video purportedly by Somali terrorist group al-Shabaab uses historic civil rights era footage of firebrand Malcolm X and audio of 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump to label the United States a racist society. The video includes recent footage of police shootings and violence against African Americans in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore — and claims that this is what is in store for American Muslims.” [CNN, 1/2/16]
Support For Torturing Terrorists
Trump Advocated For Waterboarding, “Worse Than Waterboarding,” “Whatever They Have To Do” AGainst Terror Suspects
Trump, 2016: “I Would Bring Back Waterboarding, And I’d Bring Back A Hell Of A Lot Worse Than Waterboarding.” According to NBC News, “‘I would bring back waterboarding, and I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding,’ Trump declared in the February debate just ahead of the New Hampshire primary. Calls for bringing torture back became a regular applause line at rallies, despite the likelihood that both of these ideas would require the American military to obey orders that violate international laws and federal anti-torture statutes.” [NBC News, 3/30/16]
Trump Said Belgium Authorities Should “Do Whatever They Have To Do” To Get Information From Paris Terror Suspect Salah Abdeslam, Said Waterboarding “Would Be Fine.” According to CNBC, “Donald Trump said Tuesday that authorities interrogating Paris terror suspect Salah Abdeslam should ‘do whatever they have to do’ to get information in light of the deadly attacks in Belgium. […] Abdeslam should be subjected to harsh interrogation techniques, Trump told NBC. Belgian authorities should be able to ‘do whatever they have to do’ to get information from the suspect, he continued, adding waterboarding ‘would be fine.’ ‘If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding,’ he continued. ‘You have to get the information from these people. And we have to be smart. And we have to be tough. We can’t be soft and weak.’ Dismissing critics who say harsh interrogations don’t yield reliable information, Trump said: ‘I am in the camp where you have to get the information, and you have to get it rapidly.’” [CNBC, 3/22/16]
Trump Believed Torture “Worked”
Trump, 2014: “Torture Not Working? Well, For 5,000 Years It’s Worked, But Now It’s Not Working?” According to Newsmax, “The U.S. ‘has a death wish,’ Donald Trump said Monday, pointing to the weekend release of six Guantanamo Bay prisoners, news that a Taliban commander has been allowed to return to Pakistan, and the report about CIA interrogation tactics since 9/11. ‘This whole thing on torture not working … Torture not working?’ the billionaire mogul asked incredulously on ‘Fox & Friends’ Monday. ‘Well, for 5,000 years it’s worked, but now it’s not working?’” [Newsmax, 12/8/14]
After The Attack In Istanbul, Trump Renewed Calls For Waterboarding And Blamed ISIS
Trump Called For “Fighting Fire With Fire” In Response To The Istanbul Terrorism Attacks Before There Was An Immediate Claim Of Responsibility
[Video] After The Attacks Istanbul, Trump Said That ISIS Probably Thought We Were “Weak” And “Stupid” For Not Waterboarding. According to CNN, “Donald Trump responded to Tuesday’s terror attack at a Turkish airport by calling for the U.S. to ‘fight fire with fire’ when it comes to battling ISIS, including the use of waterboarding. ‘You know, you have to fight fire with fire,’ Trump told an Ohio rally as he described ISIS’s brutal tactics, including decapitating and burning prisoners to death. Trump reiterated that U.S. leadership is ‘weak’ and ‘stupid’ and that he is in favor of using waterboarding and ‘worse’ torture methods on terror suspects.Trump described waterboarding as ‘not the nicest thing, but it’s peanuts compared to many alternatives,’ standing by previous comments he’s made on the practice, which have drawn sharp criticism throughout his presidential campaign not just from the left, but also from some fellow Republicans.” [CNN, 6/29/16]
- Trump Called For Waterboarding ISIS In Response To The Terrorist Attacks In Istanbul Before There Was Any Claim Of Responsibility. According to CNN, “Donald Trump responded to Tuesday’s terror attack at a Turkish airport by calling for the U.S. to ‘fight fire with fire’ when it comes to battling ISIS, including the use of waterboarding. […]At least 36 people died and 147 others wounded in a terror attack at Istanbul Ataturk Airport, according to Turkey’s Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag. There has been no immediate claim of responsibility. ” [CNN, 6/29/16]
Trump “Liked” Waterboarding But Did Not Think It WAs “Tough Enough”
Trump On Waterboarding: “I Like It A Lot. I Don’t Think It’s Tough Enough.” According to the Guardian, “The presumptive Republican nominee claimed that while the terrorist group committed a range of atrocities including beheading and drowning prisoners, the United States was afraid to even use waterboarding. In Trump’s opinion, this left Isis believing that the US was weak and stupid and it needs to ‘fight so viciously and violently’ to combat the threat. Trump also renewed his praise of waterboarding, which was banned by the Bush administration in 2006 as both potentially illegal and ineffective. ‘What do you think about waterboarding?’ Trump asked the crowd. They cheered as he gave his answer, ‘I like it a lot. I don’t think it’s tough enough.’” [Guardian, 6/28/16]
- Trump: “You Have To Fight Fire With Fire.” According to NBC News, “The GOP’s presumptive nominee has been outspoken on enhanced interrogation, telling Tuesday’s enthusiastic crowd once again that he doesn’t think waterboarding is ‘tough enough’ and that it’s ‘peanuts’ compared to what terrorists have done in the past. Trump lamented being limited by laws when fighting terror, allowing that waterboarding is ‘not the nicest thing,’ but advocating for its use when ‘the enemy’ is ‘chopping off people’s heads.’ ‘You have to fight fire with fire,’ Trump decided. ‘We have to be so strong. We have to fight so viciously. And violently because we’re dealing with violent people viciously.’” [NBC News, 6/28/16]
Former CIA Director Michael Hayden: Trump’s Language After The Attack Only Elevated ISIS To The Point Of Where They Could Claim Strategic Success
[Video] Former CIA Director Michael Hayden: Trump’s Language After The ISIS Attack In Turkey “Elevated Them To This Realm Where They Can Claim Strategic Success.” While appearing on CBS This Morning, former CIA Director Michael Hayden said, “Some of the language that Mr. Trump has used after the attack[…] in the language he’s used to describe them, he’s elevated them to this realm where they can claim strategic success.” [CBS This Morning, 6/30/16]
Families Of Terrorists
Wanted to “Take Out” the families of terrorists And Make Them “Suffer”
Trump On Terrorists, 2015: “You Have To Take Out Their Families.” According to the National Review, “On Fox and Friends this morning Trump talked about ISIS and was asked about civilian casualties. ‘We’re fighting a very politically correct war,’ he said. ‘The other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don’t kid yourself, but they say they don’t care about their lives. So you have to take out their families.’” [National Review, 12/2/15]
Trump On The Families Of Terrorists: “I’ll Tell You They Would Suffer.” According to CNN, “Donald Trump repeatedly evaded questions in an interview with Fox News host Bill O’Reilly about whether he would kill the families of terrorists after suggesting earlier this week that he would do just that. […] But pressed to explain himself in a later interview with O’Reilly, Trump suggested the U.S. should ‘wipe out their homes’ and ‘where they came from.’ ‘You absolutely have to wipe them out,’ Trump said. But asked explicitly whether that meant killing suspected terrorists’ families, Trump demurred. ‘I don’t want to be so bold,’ Trump said. ‘I’ll tell you they would suffer.’” [CNN, 12/3/15]
Published: Jul 21, 2016