Now, administration officials are bracing for an avalanche of criticism from human rights groups....
“By essentially endorsing Duterte’s murderous war on drugs, Trump is now morally complicit in future killings,” said John Sifton, the Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “Although the traits of his personality likely make it impossible, Trump should be ashamed of himself.”...
Mr. Trump’s cultivation of Mr. Duterte has a strategic rationale, officials said. Mr. Duterte had pivoted away from the United States, a longtime treaty ally, and toward China.... Mr. Trump, these officials said, admires Mr. Duterte’s fierce words on fighting Islamist extremists who have terrorized the southern islands of the Philippine archipelago. Mr. Duterte once declared that if he were presented with a suspected terrorist, “give me salt and vinegar and I’ll eat his liver.”
The two leaders are also in tune on the need for a crackdown on drugs, even if Mr. Trump is not advocating Mr. Duterte’s brutal methods.....
Beyond that, there is Mr. Trump’s instinctive affinity for strongmen....
April 30, 2017
Trump has a "very friendly conversation" with Duterte and invites him to the White House.
The NYT reports.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
93 comments:
1) free headspace rent in the MSM
1a) who will beclown themselves for days with exaggerations
2) pins the conversation to preventing drug violence, etc.
2a) Which keeps the national consciousness on The Wall for another few weeks.
3) Makes nice with the guy hosting the big Asian theater conference
4) Makes China notice, who is wooing the Philippines.
win, win, win, win.
The Philippines, the US has a severe strategic military problem.
I am very glad to see that this relationship is being amended.
Maybe he should invite Erdogan and Duterte to a state dinner at the same time, the more dictators the merrier.
I'd invite him, but I'd make sure his plane disappears over the pacific.
Good thing no one on the Left ever "essentially endorsed" Communism, what with all the gulaging and pograming! No need to be embarrassed about that!
Obama playing "holier than thou" with Duterte created a strategic problem for Obama's successor, which happens to be Trump. We need the Philippines, whether Inga approves of its leader or not.
Gulags? Pogroms?
Lies made up by reactionary Capitalists.
"We need the Philippines, whether Inga approves of its leader or not."
So, we ignore and thereby tacitly--or even overtly--approve of a foreign leader's egregious behavior when we need that nation for some reason or other, but we rhetorically and/or militarily go full berserker on that same foreign leader for the same behavior when we no longer need that nation, or decide to replace that leader with one more pliable to our deman--er, "needs."
Very inspiring ethical standard, that.
The conventional wisdom in foreign affairs that it is necessary for the US to work with murderers and dictators. This work doesn't mean an endorsement unless Trump is President.
Yes, our working with murderers and dictators is always an endorsement of them. And why shouldn't we? We're murderers too!
Funny how the dems/media will embrace leftist, murderous despots like Castro & Chavez, who are totally useless to the USA, and then will scorn a leader like Dutarte, who leads a long time ally of ours. The Philippines have been crucial to our national interests since 1940, and they are an absolutely essential part of our current Asian policy.
And LauderdaleVet has it exactly right (3:02). Mega dittos.
Yeah. Did human rights groups complain about the Obama-Rhodes Administration's deal with Castro?
We need the Philippines, whether Inga approves of its leader or not.
We haven't needed the Philippines since we converted our warships from coal to oil.
approve of a foreign leader's egregious behavior when we need that nation for some reason or other, but we rhetorically and/or militarily go full berserker on that same foreign leader for the same behavior when we no longer need that nation, or decide to replace that leader with one more pliable to our deman--er, "needs."
Yeah , I agree Kennedy and Johnson made serious mistakes eliminating Ngo Dinh Diem.
Funny how it is usually Democrats who do this routine.
Carter and The Shah was another disaster.
IMHO, DJT could get what we want w/o being this capitulating in this situation. The gratuitous capitulation is a special DJT thing-y.
Of course, looking at the bigger picture, who cares? It'd be nice to see more fuss re the US capitulating to the Arab loon "allies" where the SOP POTUS move is the brown nose. If it's true that there's only so much tough love to go around, aim at those SOBs and let Duterte kill whoever it is that results in him getting his rocks off.
We haven't needed the Philippines since we converted our warships from coal to oil.
Field Marshall Freder with another brilliant strategic pearl. Where does the oil come from, General ?
Whatever else he is, Duterte is not a dictator (yet). He was elected in what was probably the country's freest, fairest and best run election, thanks to, perhaps ironically, the unprecedented probity of the previous Aquino administration.
Duterte is indeed the manifest will of the people, for better or worse, and his continuing popularity confirms it. If you have a problem with him you need to consider that your beef may really be with his people.
@Freder For your strategic enlightenment. Note on the small map the proximity of these bases to other important countries in SE Asia, the now disputed South China Sea and toJapan. Maintaining a solid relationship with the government of the Philippines makes strategic sense. Given the money that we will be spending in the Philippines there's probably a good chance that we can get Duterte to behave a little better - certainly a better chance than if we ignore him. Obama talked about a pivot to Asia, Trump is actually executing that pivot.
Michel K it's very nice of you to grant Freder the Field Marshal's Baton, but like Obama's Noble prize it is unwarranted.
The only real value of the Philippines is location, location, location.
It's in a wonderful place for someone to control the world's most travelled shipping routes. This was why the US, at various times, thought it worthwhile to keep bases there.
What all East Asia needs is that China doesn't get the Philippines, or even basing rights there. It's not a question of having but of denying.
@3rd Grade Aren't you one of those who bemoans the lack of strategic importance of the ME and how we shouldn't invest anything more there? Now that Trump is moving into an area of great strategic importance your advice is to stop and go back to the unimportant ME? I am glad you are only a blog commenter and not someone in a position of responsibility.
"The only real value of the Philippines is location, location, location."
You must have missed the wapo recently. It turns out that losers are interested in it for another reason:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-sight/wp/2017/04/28/these-photos-show-life-for-displaced-typhoon-victims-forced-into-the-sex-trade/?hpid=hp_no-name_photo-story-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e575abf42aa5
Why do you accuse the media of being obsessed with Trump? Are you capable of going a single day without uploading a post on him? A conversation with the Phillipines leader is now noteworthy to you? What do you know about him that makes this in any way remotely interesting?
Other commenters said you had interests that went beyond politics. What is it about Trump that makes you so focused on him? And why would that be wrong to call it a "derangement syndrome?" Or wouldn't it be?
khes,
I'm consistently against Islamic terrorists, and the governments who have citizens that support them.
Not so concerned re Duterte ordering the killing of his citizens. In a better world, that'd be higher on the list of concerns.
PB&J,
As we have known for a while you are a truly wonderful person. Full of compassion for the masses living in deepest poverty.
Well the Philippines have always been strategically important to us in the Western Pacific--=-even more so now that China is pushing into the area and flexing its muscles.
Now Duterte appears to be a thug when it comes to his drug war; but other countries have had leaders/dictators with similar or even great body counts. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot all come to mind.
The Philippines are important to our military efforts; and I believe Winston Churchill once observed something to the effect that if Satan were to oppose Hitler, he (Churchill) might be moved to put in a good word for The Devil.
As for our host having daily comments on silliness from the left where Trump is concerned, I can only observe that she is working with a particularly target rich environment. If the progressives would stop getting their panties in a twist, she'd have much less to blog about.
@ Freder A more current article showing that we continue to commit to the Philippines.
@3rd Grade Note that we are investing money in training Duterte's anti - Islamist radical efforts. We apparently agree that we must continue to contest Islamic radicals around the globe as unpleasant as it may be at times.
Field Marshall and Fleet Admiral Freder: "We haven't needed the Philippines since we converted our warships from coal to oil."
Astonishing how much stupid can be packed into one sentence but Freder always exceeds expectations in that regard.
It's funny how US liberals have a reflexive dislike of Duterte. He is by far the most left wing person ever elected there, and his radical credentials are unimpeachable. He was a student and follower, for a time, of Jose Ma. Simon, (Joma), founder and still head of the local Maoist party. But in reality it is merely the logical inheritor of all sorts of historic leftist peasant movements.
US politics do not map to foreign countries, so it perhaps confounds people that Dutertes backers are the local "deplorables", as with Trump. That place has a heck of a lot of deplorables, and the periphery-center conflict of interests is nearly the same. But the ideological attachments are very different.
To make something else clear, the Muslim threat over there is ancient and today it is not really different from a hundred years ago, or really since maybe 1876.
Everything goes by different names, but neither the scope of violence nor the fundamental issues are much different, nor is the balance of power. The Muslims are a peripheral annoyance as they have been since Manila finally (in 1876) poured resources into keeping them suppressed.
Duterte may or may not be a good leader, but the Left here is just trying to gum up the works. Many, if not most, of foreign leaders are tyrannical autocrats. But, you still have to meet with them.
Obama meets with Raul Castro -- human rights abuses ignored.
Obama meets with Iran Prez - human rights abuses ignored.
Trump meets with Duterte -- Look at all the human rights abuses!
What policy is in the best long term interest of the United States of America?
buwaya puti said...
It's funny how US liberals have a reflexive dislike of Duterte"
The only reason they dislike him is because he dissed President Boyfriend.
If any liberal needs another reason to like Duterte, he is by far the most environmentalist politician in Asia. He seems determined to shut down half the mining industry over the issue of water contamination from tailings. This is a hugely consequential economic hit, as mining is a major export industry.
And he is also the most pro-gay, antireligious politician the country has ever elected.
A lot of US liberal commentators are remarkably parochial. I would say "stupid", but thats not really so. It is part of that bubble thinking, where there is a manufactured intellectual environment where there is no reason to struggle over contradictions.
Buwaya, what is the status of relations between the Philippines and Japan these days?
Excellent AFAIK.
They have always been happy to take Jap money and investment/ joint ventures. Plenty of Japanese manufacturers have set up shop there. Duterte has been speaking nicely about Japan.
Ah good the old "idealism vs. realpolitik" game. Frankly given the disasters that were Libya and Egypt I'm willing to give the latter a chance.
At the very least I'm just happy to have a somewhat normal political debate again as opposed to the current one which involves people claiming that the "Ok" hand gesture is a white supremacist sign.
Other commenters said you had interests that went beyond politics. What is it about Trump that makes you so focused on him? And why would that be wrong to call it a "derangement syndrome?" Or wouldn't it be?
Uh, Dude, he's president of the U.S. I think that makes him an important topic. Even lefty websites focus on Trump.
For a guy who's so full of snarky smart-assery, you'd think the smartness wouldn't be limited to your ass.
Michael K said:
"Yeah , I agree Kennedy and Johnson made serious mistakes eliminating Ngo Dinh Diem."
Eliminating is what the electorate did to Clinton in November. What Kennedy did, more or less one of the last things he did, was authorize the murder (yes, cold blooded murder, authorized by JFK) of Diem.
In one of the LBJ bios, I don't remember if Dallek or Caro, it quotes him as saying shortly after becoming president. Talking about the murder of Diem, Trujillo and some others, he said "They were running a little Murder Incorporated over there." They being John and Robert Kennedy. LBJ was not happy about it.
On the same lines, I am currently rereading McMaster's 1998 book Dereliction of Duty about how we got into Vietnam and how we prosecuted the war. This is the McMaster that is National Security Advisor. I highly recommend it and it sheds some potential light on what he and President Trump are up to.
If you read nothing else in the book, this should cause some agita:
"...that it would use military force to support its foreign policy, its international stature would be enhanced, regardless of the outcome. Because the civilian advisers conceived of the gradual application of force as a political, rather than a military, operation, they did not seriously evaluate its practical military consequences. The men charged with a comprehensive examination of U.S. policy toward Vietnam were planning for failure."
He explains very thoroughly what he means. About the only good guy on the joint chiefs was Lemay and he got fired for his opposition.
Buy the book through Ann's portal and read it. It sounds like we have someone who will not make the Vietnam mistake again.
Thank you President Trump for picking him. Thank you Wisconsin for electing President Trump.
John HEnry
Speaking of Lemay, 2 more recommendations for the portal:
While reading Dereliction of Duty, I got to wanting to know more about Lemay. I went looking for a bio and found a book he wrote about the development and utilization of the B-29. I wound up reading it first.
Then I read Tillman's bio of Lemay.
Both excellent books for those who like military history, aircraft, biography and the like.
John Henry
I have always wondered what would have happened if we had not supported nice guy Stalin during WWII. I'm sure, somewhere out there, there's some alternative historical fiction that addresses it.
Nice guy or not, we can't have a Chinese fleet based in Subic Bay. Progressive foreign policy is pure sentimentality: what position in this situation will make me feel better about myself today? Consequences be damned.
It's like up is down and down is up. First the vile Progs don't like Putin and now Duterte? Need mustard for your pretzel? Lines were a lot clearer in the 80s. Don't take our drugs away, man! Take away drugs and late term abortion, and they get pissy.
Thanks for the recommendations, John Henry. I assume McNamara was the 'brains' behind this disastrous policy.
buwaya puti said...
It's funny how US liberals have a reflexive dislike of Duterte. He is by far the most left wing person ever elected there
Wouldn't the extrajudicial killings make it prudent for people of all political persuasions to hold Duterte at arm's length?
"By essentially endorsing Duterte’s murderous war on drugs, Trump is now morally complicit,"
Exaggerate much ?
buwaya said...
Excellent AFAIK.
I asked a Chinese political science student this same question the other day and she said that the traditional suspicion of Japan in the Philippines and elsewhere remained a problem for creating regional pushback against the nine dash line.
"At the very least I'm just happy to have a somewhat normal political debate again as opposed to the current one which involves people claiming that the "Ok" hand gesture is a white supremacist sign."
A 4chan generated false flag. Today they started trolling liberal media that the two finger 'V" is a white supremacist signal for "two sexes only". They're having as much fun as Trump had last night. An extension of the Great Meme War of 2016.
Praise kek, as they say.
Hope does this compare to shoveling billions to the ayatollahs ?
should be: HOW does this compare to shoveling billions to the ayatollahs?
Blogger mockturtle said...
Thanks for the recommendations, John Henry. I assume McNamara was the 'brains' behind this disastrous policy.
Lots of folks to blame, including McNamera. McMaster and I would lay it at the Kennedy's doorstep. They were the ones to told McNamera et all to come up with a plan and then ordered it implemented. They were the ones who thought the US getting involved in VN was a good idea. A Boys Own Adventure, as I saw it described elsewhere. McMaster uses a much more serous language but at base: The Kennedy's got their hands on the levers of power and wanted to take the military out for a drive. What's the point of a military if you are not going to use it? And it is their military. No fun in having it if you can't (incompetently) micromanage it, is there?
LBJ, not at all. At least while VP. He seems to have been pretty much out of the loop until after JFKs death. Then he was all in, though he didn't want to do anything until after the November 64 election.
We should never forget just how all in he was. After campaigning on not doing anything in VN, LBJ went from 24m in 1964 to 184m in 65 and more than half a million in 1968. Yeah. He kept us out of the war. Just the same way Wilson kept us out of WWI and FDR kept us out of WWII. Hollow campaign slogans for all 3.
US Troop levels at the end of each year.
1959 760
1960 900
1961 3205
1962 11300
1963 16300
1964 23300
1965 184300
1966 385300
1967 485600
1968 536100
1969 475200
1970 334600
1971 156800
1972 24200
1973 50
Sorry for going OT. I still get upset about US stupidity in VN.
John Henry
I still get upset about US stupidity in VN.
Me, too, John. I remember it too well and too painfully.
The Philippine government of Aquino was 100% on board for "pushback", especially for assistance in rearmament of a sort sufficient to contest the sea control of that area. But this aid, to come from Japan, South Korea and the US, was never forthcoming in any substantial way.
The Philippines got a squadron of Korean trainer planes, an obsolete US Coastguard cutter, and some US-crewed Himars bombardment missiles (not yet deployed).
Pathetic.
Duterte made fun of this paltry effort last year. If the allies could not be counted on to give substantial aid, the Philippines would have to make its own arrangements.
"Very inspiring ethical standard, that."
You have to consider the long run/big picture. Think 'Stalin vs Hitler,' for example.
I have to second John Henry's recommendation of McMasters' book. I believe he made it before and I strongly recommend that everyone who has an interest in VN read it. It much more strongly condemns Johnson and the" best and brightest" than Halberstam ever did.
One of the things that struck me was that the Joint Chiefs "war gamed" increasing US military involvement when we had something on the order of 20,00 advisers, etc. in country. The US lost every iteration, but McNamara quashed the findings- which the Joint Chiefs did nothing about.
@mockturtle Read the book. LBJ was the chief culprit, but for domestic reasons that made sense to him. McNamara as you point out was the "brains" and enabler behind the whole mess ( though a lot of it was a team effort by people whose names should also "go down in infamy"). Like our recent president McNamara was sure he was smarter than everyone else and it only cost 58,000 lives and 150,00 casualties to prove that he wasn't. He and the Bundy boys taking a pretty good- and well-deserved - beating from McMasters and everyone else.
Heh! I went to order it and I see it's already on my kindle. Looking forward to reading it soon.
khes,
Do you think you're smarter than BHO?
Keep in mind, he w/o notes school all the Rs in the House who came at him w/ prepared questions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1-jasxb7NY
And, keep in mind that it sorta blows a hole in your comparison of two dudes if the two dudes end up w/ completely different results, e.g. VN war v not VN type war.
If you concede it's possible that you're not smarter, don't ya got to, by definition, have some uncertainty re the suggestion that your knowledge is superior?
Carry on.
The CIA should assassinate both Kim Jung Un, and Duterte, and make it look like an accident. The Mossad is well-known for doing things like that, generally successfully.
Trumpit, that's just the sort of crap we were doing in the 60's with disastrous results. Let us hope you're not serious.
3rd Grade Peanut Butter; while you are hyperventilating about the Trumpster meeting with Duterte--think back to when Nancy Pelosi--her own inimitably nasty self, put on a hijab and went off to the Middle East to meet with some greasy tinpot dictator. Probably Assad--but I could be wrong. I can't recall you getting your knickers in a knot over that excursion.
Com V,
FTR, my comments say that I'm not fussing when Duterte orders the killing of his own folks, because we've got bigger figurative fish to fry.
So, that's gonna require an adjustment re your POV re me.
And, also FTR Re Nancy, her work seems to be settling out. Her face seems less odd now.
Speaking of work, are Ivanka's tits real?
Just for the record...we won the Vietnam War.
The Democrats in Congress lost the peace two years later.
"Trumpit, that's just the sort of crap we were doing in the 60's with disastrous results. Let us hope you're not serious."
I'm very serious. An evil monster, like Kim Jung Un, must be confronted and defeated before he kills millions. If he can't be eliminated stealthily, then I'd drop a small nuke on him and his entourage. If they start to launch nuclear missiles, I'd incinerate the whole country in a heartbeat.
Name one instance, Trumpit, where we had a positive outcome from offing a head of state.
Blogger The Toothless Revolutionary said...
Why do you accuse the media of being obsessed with Trump?
I don't know, maybe stuff like this?
https://www.bing.com/search?q=trump+joke+in+unbreakable+kimmy+schmidt&pc=MOZI&form=MOZSBR
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/US/Foreign_Assassinations_since_1945
Meeting with people is not an endorsement of what they're doing. Given we agree to meet with all sorts of murderous thugs and bastards at the UN in the name of...whatever the vision is these days for Turtle Bay, it hardly seems noteworthy to single out meeting with Duterte, who is not only the Philippine president but also the current head of ASEAN. Whose country also currently happens to be on the UN's Human Rights Council.
Meanwhile it seems an odd complaint to single him out for trying to fight drug gangs. Out of any group a politician could target for violence, selecting one involved in criminal activity seems a legitimate use of state authority. I am rather tired of "human rights groups" siding with the criminal element rather than the massively larger group of poor people who also have a right to be free of the criminal and predatory activity of gangs.
Speaking of work, are Ivanka's tits real?
4/30/17, 10:12 PM
No, PBJ, the proper term for the first daughter's breasts is *unreal.*
We know President Trump's take on implants. Daddy's girl would never do that. Ivanka is all natural, you betcha.
Odds are,
Is your girl hotter than Ivanka Trump? The answer is no.
Is your girl smarter than Ivanka Trump? The answer is no.
Blogger Robert Cook said...
"We need the Philippines, whether Inga approves of its leader or not."
So, we ignore and thereby tacitly--or even overtly--approve of a foreign leader's egregious behavior when we need that nation for some reason or other, but we rhetorically and/or militarily go full berserker on that same foreign leader for the same behavior when we no longer need that nation, or decide to replace that leader with one more pliable to our deman--er, "needs."
Very inspiring ethical standard, that.
4/30/17, 3:23 PM
Congratulations, Robert! Now when do you plan to lose your virginity? After that, I have a top secret briefing for you on Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
Bad L,
I can't make that comparison. I'm a poor judge of Invanka's looks because she looks very much like one of my cousins, except my cousin has less facial feature incongruity, is thinner, and has definitely had fake tits put in. Overly evaluating Ivanka feels incest-y.
And, because of a lack of firsthand info, I have no way of knowing Ivanka's brain power re other gals. She's made lots of dough, so I tend to think that means she'd be pretty smart. I've haven't done gals who've made hundreds of millions of dollars, but they are still bigly brilliant.
I dunno.
Are you pests still at it?
Of course, when Obama answered affirmatively as a candidate when asked if he would "be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of [his] administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries," he was lauded for his diplomacy.
Quoting Obama: "I would, and the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of [the Bush] administration — is ridiculous."
Is the President of the Philippines so much worse than Assad, Khamenei, Maduro, Castro, or Jong-il?
" I highly recommend it and it sheds some potential light on what he and President Trump are up to. "
I read it years ago and thought it would end his career. Instead he went from LTC to LT General.
Trump seems to be working the Chinese around to solving the NK problem with us.
A tremendous accomplishment if he can pull it off. The left wing trolls are all against it. That suggests it will work.
All's for the best in this best of all possible administrations.
What is it about Trump that makes you so focused on him? And why would that be wrong to call it a "derangement syndrome?" Or wouldn't it be?
You're not paying attention. Our hostess clearly is focusing on the derangement syndrome of Trump's opponents in the media. As someone who is no fan of Trump recently said, Trump is extremely fortunate in his enemies. Somehow, he instinctively knows how to get into their knickers and make them scratch furiously at the itch.
The Dems are getting tagged with all of this foam-flecked raving and the masked "protestors". If he achieves nothing else, he will have a full 8 year term
You lefties still can't fathom that YOU are the reason Trump won.
- Krumhorn
- Krumhorn
So, we ignore and thereby tacitly--or even overtly--approve of a foreign leader's egregious behavior
If your standard for "egregious" is Duerte's behavior in his war on drugs, consistent condemnation would require applying equal-or-greater opprobrium to the leaders of Russia, China, India, every country in Southeast Asia, every country in the Middle East, almost every country in Africa . . .
The available choices for consistent moral condemnation are never morally condemn, set the standard for condemnation such that Duerte isn't worth condemning, or condemn countries making up at least half the world.
Blogger Comanche Voter said...
"3rd Grade Peanut Butter; while you are hyperventilating about the Trumpster meeting with Duterte--think back to when Nancy Pelosi--her own inimitably nasty self, put on a hijab and went off to the Middle East to meet with some greasy tinpot dictator. Probably Assad--but I could be wrong. I can't recall you getting your knickers in a knot over that excursion."
I'm finding the total lack of self awareness highly amusing.Especially in this knucklehead.
Maybe Trump should treat Duterte the same way Jimmy Carter treated the Shah of Iran, also a tyrant. Treat him as an albatross and watch him fall. That led to all the stability we now see in the ME.
You don't want foreign policy run by political correctness.
"Obama meets with Raul Castro -- human rights abuses ignored.
Obama meets with Iran Prez - human rights abuses ignored.
Trump meets with Duterte -- Look at all the human rights abuses!"
-- Much like the plight of homelessness, the left has more time to think about human rights abuses when it is not in power.
Overly evaluating Ivanka feels incest-y.
Why go to the mall, when you can go down the hall???
(I kid, of course...)
Give it up Liberals...Presidents meet with tyrants all the time...Obama met with Iranian president, Castro, ect....and CRICKETS..Also Obama had more flexibility after the election with Russia...CRICKETS again....
One of the best comments here came from Buwaya. The only thing I would add is that China has been plowing a ton of $ into the Philippines lately. The Filipinos are split in their regard for the USA, the proportions of which, I'm not exactly sure of. Half of my family comes from Manila, and my grandfather resented America. So there's that. I spent time in the Navy and was home ported in Subic Bay at the end of the Vietnam War. Subic is a vital element in our presence there, an asset lost. During the recent build up of islands in the South China Sea, Obama did little to back up the Philippines to push back against the territorial aggression. Let's see what Trump will do.
The two leaders are also in tune on the need for a crackdown on drugs, even if Mr. Trump is not advocating Mr. Duterte’s brutal methods..... Beyond that, there is Mr. Trump’s instinctive affinity for strongmen....
Evidently President Duterte has decided that the Philippines are not going to become the next Mexico – which is corrupted from top to bottom by drug cartels, a situation seemingly intractable once a certain advanced stage is reached.
Dear NYT: It is a war and it is a war that some regions in Central and South America seem to be losing. Paramilitary civil forces engaged in military tactics in the early stages might be just the ticket to beat the cartels with their ruthless violence and enormous amounts of cash to throw around.
"Obama meets with Raul Castro -- human rights abuses ignored.
Obama meets with Iran Prez - human rights abuses ignored.
Trump meets with Duterte -- Look at all the human rights abuses!"
Meeting with a foreign leader is a lot different than inviting him or her to the White House.
Well, gee, I wonder what the NYT would have said, had FDR sided with Stalin in WW2.
Oh, wait...
Grackle opines: Dear NYT: It is a war and it is a war that some regions in Central and South America seem to be losing. Paramilitary civil forces engaged in military tactics in the early stages might be just the ticket to beat the cartels with their ruthless violence and enormous amounts of cash to throw around.
Agree. And we need to clean our own house. Having DEA officials on the cartel payroll doesn't help fight the war on drugs.
Can't people see that Donald Trump instinctively honors courageous War leaders on either side. And this tiger wants to fight our enemies.
Not honoring Duerte would be very shameful in Trump's world.
the press in the USA has a vendetta against Duterte, but they seem to ignore the much larger number of murders in the drug wars of Mexico, or even the murder rate in Chicago.
The back story is that the US backed another candidate (aka "The American girl") and now is trying to get Duterte removed (See #Lenileaks).
Not to mention that President Obama
Most of the murders were vigilante justice by cops or ordered by locals who couldn't get justice in the courts.
And now, the murder rate is down, and the cops are being vented for corruption.
See: https://www.strategypage.com/qnd/phillip/articles/20170317.aspx
By the way: Our nephew was killed in the crossfire ten years ago, in a hit by the (corrupt) mayor against the family of his political rival. He wasn't arrested until Aquino became president, but even then never went to court and died in his bed last year.
We could have arranged a hit on him but as Fil-Ams relied on local justice.
HA>
Freder: "Meeting with a foreign leader is a lot different than inviting him or her to the White House."
LOL
Hey Field Marshall Freder, how about fixing your own house before lecturing others?
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3641870
Obama bragged about how he'd talk to any world leader without preconditions, and all of his fawning sychophants said that was "Smart diplomacy" Suddenly they are mad that leaders will say they will talk to other leaders?
How quickly liberals forget. Obama was literally the last president, remember?
Would you meet with Iran without preconditions -
Obama: "I would, And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous."
He argued that "Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire."
You don't say?
Funny how the libs turn on a dime and argue things are bad which they applauded only a few years ago.
and Trump never said he'd meet with NK leader w/o preconditions.
Post a Comment