Next to Jeb Bush, Donald Trump sounds positively sane on foreign policy

[seafan]

Jeb has NO effing clue what he is yammering about. This is yet another reason why he should be summarily disqualified from seeking the presidency.

There's one guy in this presidential race who wants to pursue a Mideast policy that could lead to the slaughter of thousands of Christians by Islamic radicals.

And there's another one who questions why the U.S. ever got involved there in the first place.

So why is Donald Trump considered the crazy one?

In that Aug. 6 debate and in interviews, Trump has made a point of noting that he was against the Iraq War before it was cool to say so. He likes to cite a 2004 Esquire article in which he asked "Does anybody really believe that Iraq is going to be a wonderful democracy?" after the U.S. left. He went on to predict that "the meanest, toughest, smartest, most vicious guy will take over."

That pretty much describes ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

But Bush went on to make further comments that show he still doesn't understand the peril his policies would create for innocent civilians in Syria.

That came when Bush called for defeating ISIS by removing from power the worst enemy of ISIS.

That's dictator Bashar al-Assad. If Assad were to topple, the inevitable result would be the massacre of Syrian's Christians, according to one New Jersey resident who grew up in the region.

Joseph Hakim of Bergen County is the president of the International Christian Union, a group that has been warning of the potential peril to Christians and other minority religions if Assad were to fall.

"Assad is a horrible person, but overthrowing him you're just turning the country into a no-man's-land," he said. "The Christians are gonna be slaughtered. The Alawites are gonna be slaughtered. The Yazidis are gonna be slaughtered."

Bush proposes to remove ISIS by imposing a no-fly zone in Syria.

.....

ISIS doesn't have an air force. The Syrian government does. What Bush is proposing is to defeat ISIS by shooting down the planes that attack ISIS.

"There are three countries that run ISIS," (Hakim) said. "Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar."

As for Bush, his approach to ISIS brings up yet another family failing, that penchant for putting themselves in the back pocket of the Saudis. What he's repeating are talking points out of Riyadh.

The Donald certainly has his faults, but at least seems to have made up his own talking points. And he's talking sense compared to the hand-picked choice of the party leaders.

What an ignorant embarrassment.

Bush mimicked some of his big brother’s bravado, using phrases such as “enemies of freedom” and “tighten the noose” and “take them out,” and he defended the surge in Iraq. But what brought him closest to his kin were the random oddities in his speech. He declared that “whoever created the terminology BRIC would have to change the name,” without explaining that BRIC referred to emerging economies Brazil, Russia, India and China.

At another point he had trouble coming up with the English name for “Plan Colombia” and explained, “Sometimes my mind switches, and I apologize.” He propounded the curious theory that “the more tepid the economic growth” the less likely NATO members are to “defend themselves” militarily. He said that with President Obama’s “pivot” to Asia, “the rest of the world wonders, am I the pivotee?” And he described the Islamic State leader as “the guy that’s the supreme leader, whatever his new title is, head of the caliphate.”

Bush admitted that his foreign policy was still in the training phase. “Look, the more I get into this stuff, there are some things [where] you just go, you know, ‘Holy schnikes.’ ”

If he keeps talking like this, Americans may say the same of him.

Arrogance and ignorance are a terrible combination.

[ellisonz]

1. Can we just feed both of them to the lions?

[world wide wally]

2. And they all agree that the Iran deal somehow makes ISIS stronger.

Stupid rules in the USA