Trump and Bachmann Share a Dangerous Foreign Policy

by Kyle Perkins

Michele Bachmann has gone on the record in saying she wants to give Donald Trump his advice on foreign policy.

The problems I have with this have nothing to do with black-and-white binary thinking that either one agrees with Ron Paul on every foreign policy issue or one thinks America has a job to sink any nation that’s not America. Instead, my problems lie within the fact that Bachmann and Trump both have no ideology, no core values. Other problems stem from the fact that neither one has had any understanding of any more than two issues: Iran and Israel.

These two, Trump and Bachmann, only began learning third issues in foreign policy some months ago. As a neo-libertarian, I have been studying the issues of foreign policy with enormous attention to detail since 2007. This is only three years longer than I have been a libertarian for, mind you.

What began my passionate interest in politics was actually my discovery of the Sudan regime and its ideology. And so I now see this grand opportunity to refute any idea of Trump and Bachmann being legit.

1. Maritime Trade

The very first thing I ought to point out is Bachmann’s mixed record on free trade. As one who is truly possible to call a centrist but not possible to call left-wing or right-wing, I do not support people like Bachmann who are centrists on the issue of maritime trade. But from the same source, it is clarified that she is vaguely more often in favor of free trade.

Trump, on the other hand, is heavily abysmal on maritime trade. I don’t think I need to link to anything to tell you this is on display in his rhetoric about “losing to everybody” and “America first” he has for every time he is directly asked of maritime trade.

2. Iran’s Belligerence

Trump and Bachmann accept the facts of life about Iran, but have yet to explain the full history of it. This is something I intellectually need to call them both out on, because Iran’s history of and motive for attacking its neighbors both predate the births of this country’s Founders, by a long way.

The start of why Iran attacks its neighbors, us included, is the Rashidun Conquest of Persia. Iran was called Persia until middle 20th century, and during the mid-7th century, it became what it is today. The only regime difference is that Medieval Iran was a monarchy. The technology differences are self-explanatory.

Iran was changed by its own people to a republic in 1979. This was sparked by Ruhollah Khomeini, with his aims to enslave the Earth to his vision of government.

3. Israel’s Independence

After World War II, the nation of Israel was made its own country to give the Jewish ethnicity a new home in 1947. During that time, the Arab League formed in part because of a severe hostility all 22 members had to this idea. In the first year of Israel and the Arab League being realities, the League waged a War of Aggression on Israel. Thus the Arab-Israeli Conflict began, and is now 68 years old and still going.

Bachmann’s knowledge of this history is far too limited for her to be a foreign policy advisor. In addition, the problem with her advising about Israel is she sides with them for the wrong reasons. She wants us to side with Israel from a traditional values and religious fundamentalist angle. Here is the problem with this angle: Israeli civility was not borne of that angle. Rather it was borne out of belief in skepticism and liberty, and this is proven by the city of Tel Aviv doing nearly all of the civil and market work of Israel. Bachmann thinks Jerusalem does all of the work in keeping Israel alive and holding up a capital city for it. Some perspective for Bachmann:

• New York City does most, if not all of America’s work in fiscally staying prosperous
• Washington DC does almost none of this legit work for America

However, Bachmann’s self-misguidance on Israel is trivial compared to Trump’s.

Trump comes right out and pretends like cooking up a deal between Israel and the Arab League is going to get the Arab League to stop harassing Israel. Perhaps asking Bill Clinton and George W. Bush how that worked out is a good idea, as both tried this and in both cases the League proved to us in action that it was lying.

4. US Military Reform

I can list all of the changes to the US military that I think are totally legitimate.

Turning power abuse cases over to private courts is one legitimate need I can name in this field. The only known example is with cases of sexual assault by higher officers against lower ones, and the military courts prove they are not fit to handle these cases.

Another change our military needs is replacing high-price tools with drastically low-price tools that work just as well.

Let me cut to the chase: Trump and Bachmann both think that making our military bigger is correct. I am going to tell these two no from an avidly Pro-Military angle, by putting two facts in one sentence.

• On one hand, our military is the biggest in the world, with $600 billion of yearly funds and 1.3 million active duty warriors; but on the other hand, its job of ensuring foreign governments do not violate our Bill of Rights with how they treat us requires them to take a defensive posture where and when they can.

Yes, I do oppose carrying out military interventions that are not about enforcing the Bill of Rights for the American People. But I also know the geographic strategy in overseas deployment and Stable alliances. Which brings us to the next issue.

5. Unstable Alliances

When this country was in its infancy, George Washington thought up the Washington Doctrine of Unstable Alliances. This came to him as part of promoting that brand of foreign interventionism many don’t know enough about: Realism. What this Realist foreign policy pillar claims is that America needs to treat alliances like part-time luxuries and abandon allies who turn out to be straight-up mentally unstable.

Sadly, this is not something either one of Bachmann or Trump have any awareness of. Instead, we see plenty of obscenity from them favoring alliance with visibly Unstable regimes like Russia. Trump in particular shares Obama’s bitterness toward Stable allies, Russian & European History scholar Stephen Sestanovich reports.

Frankly, the only Unstable alliance we have through NATO is ours with Turkey. And that is fully due to an Anti-Israel, Anti-Liberty ruling by President Erdogan.

6. Sudan Regime

To begin, I mentioned my studying of Sudan’s regime is what sparked my interest in politics, primarily foreign policy. Allow me to elaborate on why that is, but also and more importantly how the lack of a stance on Sudan that Trump and Bachmann share is not just about the Right that I believe every Free Society has under the Right of Self-Defense to collapse any golden rule-breaking tyranny it wants to. It is primarily about Sudan having a record as a State Sponsor of Terror starting in the 1990s.

Something Trump and Bachmann have in common is they have yet to say so much as a one-word sentence about this Non-compatibility with the Bill of Rights that Sudan’s regime embodies. The rule of their ‘president’ Omar al-Bashir is not just about Darfur. He also has a track record of harboring our enemies and allowing them to murder American civilians in embassies, mainly in 1998. He was not going to stop sponsoring crimes against the American People until 2007.

Where were Trump and Bachmann in calling Omar al-Bashir out on his callous disregard for human freedom? Where were these two in calling him out on his nearly a decade of crimes against the liberties and the freedom of American People? Neither US Executive branch candidate said anything. And also, Sudan only dropped its alliance with Iran a year ago. And this was to ally with a nation who feigns alliance with us, who I will discuss next.

7. Saudi Arabia

Here is something else Donald Trump and Michele Bachmann have yet to speak up about. Every resource we give to Saudi Arabia, whether our weapons for their money or our money for their fossil fuels, is just more logistics for them to pump into callous crimes against the Bill of Rights.

George W. Bush failed to be honest with the American People about Saudi role in Al-Qaeda and in 9/11. This is why 28 pages of the intel report on it were censored and heavily locked and keyed until very recently. Evidence is very clear that of the 19 hijackers of 9/11, a sizable 15 of them were Saudis.

Numerous studies have been done by Westerners of many political affiliations about this sponsorship of terror, like this BPR study. As for Bachmann and Trump though, they have done no such studying, or at least not that we’ve seen.

There are easily far more foreign policy issues to discuss that Trump and Bachmann share a lack of stance on, but as someone who aspires to vote Johnson and Weld into office, I say this lack of stance that Trump & Bachmann share will only be of detriment to the Liberty Movement if Trump becomes president. Which I will be one of those voting “No” to in the names of Johnson & Weld.