I beg to disagree.
Trump as vacillated between threatening to rain hell fury on the "Little Rocket Man" to seeking a diplomatic rapprochement (for which I praised him). He has threatened military action several times against North Korea, both in words and deeds.
The Trump team hand selected Guido (sp?) to become America's puppet in Venezuela. And has attempted a coup which failed. Trump's Sec. of State, Pompeo, has repeatedly said the military option is on the table.
We not only have threatened war in Syria, we've dropped hundreds (if not thousands) of bombs on Syria. We have armed two opposing factions in Syria.
You already admit we threaten Iran (on an almost daily basis), and the latest reasons for our threats have been scoffed at by our allies.
Regarding the author’s comparison between tariffs and war, I regret I am too computer ignorant to know how to ,post a link within a post, but I would direct your attention to the link provided in the OP when he makes such a claim, a claim that has been leveled at Trump by our allies.
On the whole Donald Trump has been a middling president, not great and not horrible. He most certainly is superior to what Hillary would have been. (She's so beholden to the Neocons she would have had us in a war within 6 months.) I applaud him on much of his domestic agenda. But his foreign policy is a giant cluster. He obviously doesn't know what he's doing, and he's leaving decisions up to the same palookas that Obama relied upon.
It is not without reason that many people, Americans and allies alike, are clutching their pearls. His (the Neocons') version of brinksmanship is incredibly dangerous. People such as this author, people pointing out the stupidity of our foreign policy under Neocon control, are not necessarily anti-Trump or anti-American. They are serious people that are very concerned over what our policy may lead to. They are not unpatriotic. Just the opposite, in fact.
I never thought you were so millinialish to assume that every tweet is 100% literal and would be enacted immediately. Actions mean more to me than a 128 characters. And his actions have been to suspend the wargames with SK and actually meet and negotiate with the leader of NK. That's a long ass ways from threaten war.
Did we hand select Guido? Not sure. But I agree we supported him and even his coupe attempt. Something needs to be done and that's a whole lot different than sending American troops to overthrow the government. Proof is in the pudding. When Guido didn't get his peoples and military's support and his coupe attempt fell apart, we let it. We didn't suddenly send in troops to ensure our guy's win. Its worth noting that 10% of the country's population has become refugees in Columbia (over 3 million people). Can't fault the president for trying something to help while showing restraint in regards to our own troops.
Syria. That's a laugh. Yes, we launched rockets. Following our allies all agreeing that the country Chemically Gassed its own people. I actually didn't like the attack. I don't think Assad did it, but that's what the media reported that the UN (our allies) were reporting. So a single, restrained, targeted attack in response to a serious war crime, again fails to support this war-monger attitude that is attributed to Trump.
Iran is the lone outlier, but I don't see us getting into a war there either.
As for the author's comparisons of tariffs and war, its irrelevant who makes the comparison. #FACTS, if tariffs equal war, then we have been at war since George Washington was president. Generally with our greatest allies. Its a stupid analogy no matter who says it. As for sanctions, the ones we are talking about (NK) are our allies sanctions. These were passed by UN Security resolutions. Articles stating that our allies don't support these actions seem pretty obtuse about the fact that its the allies who passed the sanctions in the first place. Trump just happens to be the first president who has actually and forcibly enforced them.
I don't like Brinksmanship, but I also recognize that for some it works. I find it odd that the media has reported for years that Kim Jun Un (?) is a childlike imbecile who has no real understanding of diplomacy. Past presidents from both sides have failed to reason with him (or his prior family) and reach any kind of accord. Trump dumbed everything down, treated him like he was 12 and amazingly got through to him, and outside of one short-range missile test (more on this in a minute), has basically been on good behavior since Trump explained in 12 year old terms, that the consequence of not cooperating isn't more talk (like the past 10 presidents) but is more significant. And lets be honest. Trump only told the truth. If NK attacked Japan or SK, the crater the US would create would make South Korea an island.
Oh and about that short range missile launch. It was such an amazing coincidence that it happened the week that China reneged on its trade agreements. The one political position where both parties agreed with Trump and his trade administration that China had negotiated in bad faith and was responsible for the breakdown. You don't think China wanted some distraction on the world stage? Trump is right here. There is nothing to worry about in regards to the short-range missile tests by NK. China wanted a distraction, and the anti-Trump media was more than happy to play this global game of 3-card Monty.
In the end, frankly, I agree with most of Trump's actions on the world stage. I think he looked stupid with his comments on Biden while in Japan (today). That's the unpresidential side that I don't like about him. But as for actual policy, my issues are pretty minor. Too many countries have been scared to do anything that China won't like because they want access to the Billion people and growing economy that China offers. Trump is the first politician in years (and not just in this country) that has actually had the balls to stand up to China and demand fair play rather than turn a blind eye on the atrocities of trade, IP theft, and human rights violations that China has engaged in for years. I applaud him. He understands that China needs us as much as we need them and is willing to use that leverage for the betterment of society.
Beyond this, what else foreign policy wise has Trump done? He pulled out of the Paris accord. I agree with him here. He brought visibility to the failings of basically every other NATO member in regards to holding their end of the NATO accord in regards to defense spending and NATO budgeting. He's called out the absurdities of the UN Human Rights council being chaired by IRAN of all countries as well as our outsized share of the org's funding. Agree with him on both points. He moved our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I thought it was a waste of money, but signaled our strong support of Israel. This is probably the one area where you could criticize Trump the most. He is very pro-Israel, and its shows starkly compared to Obama's very anti-Israel positions. There's probably middle ground between the two that is more ideal for the US.
Finally, I've not called anyone Unamerican. Everyone is allowed an opinion. I don't agree with the NEOCONS. I don't want boots on the ground anywhere but our borders. But you can't blame Trump for any of the current messes. But I agree with him on both points. Where we are, we are there to win. And thus we MOABed areas, and the ISIS caliphate is no longer. And when the mission is done, we should be getting our troops home, yet as he's tried this, the real globalists who write these same Anti-Trump articles, are the ones interviewing the generals they know will disagree with any reduction in force, so they can get their story that Trump is going against his general's recommendations and we should continue keeping our troops in the ME.
Sorry for the dissertation. Got enthused writing this. I've stated my positions, and why they are what they are, and I think I covered all the positions from the prior posts and the article. Feel free to discuss or counter as you see fit.
