Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (36) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84350 
Subject: Re: Trumpedo: "guns-a-blazing," baby
Date: 11/01/25 10:24 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 5
Serious question: At what point do republicans and the media admit that this guy is insane?

I think when he actually does go into a country, "guns-a-blazing."

Trump frequently makes threats. He seems to have no compunction about whether or not he will stand behind the threats he makes - for example, he has threatened Hamas several times, but no one seriously believes there's any likelihood that Trump will send U.S. troops into Gaza.

Trump believes - probably foolishly, perhaps even naively - that such threats are useful and effective tools of foreign policy, even though they are mostly empty threats. They are not always completely empty. In situations where the U.S. can use military force without any possibility of U.S. casualties (like blowing up fishing vessels from a distance), and against countries that cannot plausibly retaliate or escalate (like Venezuela) those threats are more credible - but only to the extent of action that cannot result in U.S. casualties. Since there is only a limited set of circumstances where such threats are credible, most of his threats are dismissed as empty.

Since Trump shows no signs of believing there are any long-term costs to U.S. credibility from making empty threats, his practice of frequently making them is not "insane." It's just wrongheaded and stupid. If he were to actually launch an invasion of Venezuela or Nigeria, that might generate more of a reaction from Republicans and the media.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (36) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community