Cheney: Trump, GOP Isolationist Movement ‘Wrong,’ ‘Dangerous’

[mystery-ak]

Cheney: Trump, GOP Isolationist Movement ‘Wrong,’ ‘Dangerous’

Pam Key 27 Feb 2022

Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that former President Donald Trump leading the Republican Party to an isolationist stance was both wrong and dangerous.

Partial transcript as follows:

    MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about where the conservative movement is these days with Russia. J.D. Vance, an Ohio candidate for Senate, said on a podcast recently, ‘I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other.’ Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri told CBS the U.S. should not send troops to any NATO country since the U.S. can’t afford it. So there is this non-interventionist, isolationist movement that President Trump himself really endorsed with America First. I mean, how do you explain to voters why that view- Republican view- is wrong?

    CHENEY: Look, we’ve- we’ve been down that road before, we’ve seen isolationism in both parties, and it’s always been wrong and it’s always been dangerous. America cannot defend and maintain our own freedom and security if we think that we’re going to simply withdraw from the world and not lead. You know, we are watching today the brutality of Vladimir Putin as he attempts to invade a democratic sovereign nation.

    And anyone who thinks that U.S. freedom and security is going to be maintained if we take a step back and don’t lead, you simply need to look at what’s happening in Ukraine to recognize that- that those who fill the void when the U.S. steps away are people like the Russians, like the Chinese, like the Iranians. And so the idea that- that the world will be safe and that America will be able to be safe and free with an isolationist approach is wrong. It’s also wrong morally. You know, America stands for freedom. America was founded on fundamental principles of freedom.

    And- and I think it’s- it’s indefensible for people to abandon those or suggest that we are- we have no- no view as between Russia and Ukraine in this battle.

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2022/02/27/cheney-trump-gop-isolationist-movement-wrong-dangerous/

[Smokin Joe]

Trump was not isolationist, he just sought ways to achieve what decades of bloodshed had not.

As far as getting out of countries we had failed to impose "democracy" on, it was time to get off the pot.

Cheney and the war mongers would rather write history in the blood of our troops than simply use the ink in treaties.

And Trump did portray that he was willing to use force, when necessary, which is why Ukraine is being invaded now, not 4 years ago.

[Kamaji]

Trump was not isolationist, he just sought ways to achieve what decades of bloodshed had not.

As far as getting out of countries we had failed to impose "democracy" on, it was time to get off the pot.

Cheney and the war mongers would rather write history in the blood of our troops than simply use the ink in treaties.

And Trump did portray that he was willing to use force, when necessary, which is why Ukraine is being invaded now, not 4 years ago.

Four agreements with Israel and its historic opponents speaks volumes.

[andy58-in-nh]

Cheney's assertion is a classic "strawman" argument.

No one is suggesting that America "simply withdraw from the world".

Well, maybe Pat Buchanan is making that argument, but certainly not the mainstream Republican Party, of which Ms. Cheney finds herself no longer a member.

Instead, many GOP members, most certainly those who supported Donald Trump are arguing that America cannot simply commit its blood and treasure everywhere an adversary acts aggressively.

The argument is not for "withdrawal" from the world but for choosing wisely if and how to respond to potential threats, relying on economic and political leverage, as opposed to military force as a first resort. This strategy implies a decision about what America's fundamental interests truly are, and thus acting with restraint where our interests are not directly threatened. 

The business of Neocon GOP'ers sending other people's kids to fight their wars in far-flung places has been an abysmal failure, and Donald Trump was absolutely right to point that out.

In the case of the current conflict in Ukraine, America's interests are not directly threatened, but in time they may be. So the wise course of action (in my estimation) would be to use our intelligence resources, logistical support, and indirect military aid, as well as economic and political leverage to hurt Russia and impede their ability to successfully conclude the invasion.

Of course, the one way in which we could most directly threaten Putin's long-term goals would be to open up America's energy markets for research, investment, development and production.

Which is exactly why the idiot Biden won't do it.
 

[Kamaji]

Cheney's assertion is a classic "strawman" argument.

No one is suggesting that America "simply withdraw from the world".

Well, maybe Pat Buchanan is making that argument, but certainly not the mainstream Republican Party, of which Ms. Cheney finds herself no longer a member.

Instead, many GOP members, most certainly those who supported Donald Trump are arguing that America cannot simply commit its blood and treasure everywhere an adversary acts aggressively.

The argument is not for "withdrawal" from the world but for choosing wisely if and how to respond to potential threats, relying on economic and political leverage, as opposed to military force as a first resort. This strategy implies a decision about what America's fundamental interests truly are, and thus acting with restraint where our interests are not directly threatened. 

The business of Neocon GOP'ers sending other people's kids to fight their wars in far-flung places has been an abysmal failure, and Donald Trump was absolutely right to point that out.

In the case of the current conflict in Ukraine, America's interests are not directly threatened, but in time they may be. So the wise course of action (in my estimation) would be to use our intelligence resources, logistical support, and indirect military aid, as well as economic and political leverage to hurt Russia and impede their ability to successfully conclude the invasion.

Of course, the one way in which we could most directly threaten Putin's long-term goals would be to open up America's energy markets for research investment, development and production.

Which is exactly why the idiot Biden won't do it.
 

[Killer Clouds]

The US is helping finance Russia's invasion of Ukraine by purchasing their oil. Traitor Joe is too stupid to understand any of that. Traitor Joe and the whole DCP have no clue why this happened or how to solve it.

[LMAO]

Cheney's assertion is a classic "strawman" argument.

No one is suggesting that America "simply withdraw from the world".

Well, maybe Pat Buchanan is making that argument, but certainly not the mainstream Republican Party, of which Ms. Cheney finds herself no longer a member.

Instead, many GOP members, most certainly those who supported Donald Trump are arguing that America cannot simply commit its blood and treasure everywhere an adversary acts aggressively.

The argument is not for "withdrawal" from the world but for choosing wisely if and how to respond to potential threats, relying on economic and political leverage, as opposed to military force as a first resort. This strategy implies a decision about what America's fundamental interests truly are, and thus acting with restraint where our interests are not directly threatened. 

The business of Neocon GOP'ers sending other people's kids to fight their wars in far-flung places has been an abysmal failure, and Donald Trump was absolutely right to point that out.

In the case of the current conflict in Ukraine, America's interests are not directly threatened, but in time they may be. So the wise course of action (in my estimation) would be to use our intelligence resources, logistical support, and indirect military aid, as well as economic and political leverage to hurt Russia and impede their ability to successfully conclude the invasion.

Of course, the one way in which we could most directly threaten Putin's long-term goals would be to open up America's energy markets for research investment, development and production.

Which is exactly why the idiot Biden won't do it.

Good post

[GtHawk]

Trump was not isolationist, he just sought ways to achieve what decades of bloodshed had not.

As far as getting out of countries we had failed to impose "democracy" on, it was time to get off the pot.

Cheney and the war mongers would rather write history in the blood of our troops than simply use the ink in treaties.

And Trump did portray that he was willing to use force, when necessary, which is why Ukraine is being invaded now, not 4 years ago.

Agreed, first thing I thought reading the headline. I wish I could say I was surprised how all the usual players are trying to lay this fiasco at Trumps feet even though it is Biden who has undone everything Trump accomplished to avert wars for his four years.

[Free Vulcan]

Why would I listen to warmongering globalists who want to send our soldiers everywhere in the world there's a conflict so that they can die for absolutely nothing?

[LMAO]

She’s confusing isolationism with non-interventionism

[dfwgator]

Does she ever criticize Democrats?

[christian]

Please notice the game afoot.  The more Bidens reign turns to crap, the more Biden stooges want to concentrate on how Trump is not good enough. Desperate attempts to shift focus away from Bidens abominable incompetence, and anti-America agendas.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Trump was not isolationist, he just sought ways to achieve what decades of bloodshed had not.

As far as getting out of countries we had failed to impose "democracy" on, it was time to get off the pot.

Cheney and the war mongers would rather write history in the blood of our troops than simply use the ink in treaties.

And Trump did portray that he was willing to use force, when necessary, which is why Ukraine is being invaded now, not 4 years ago.

    

[libertybele]

Does she ever criticize Democrats?

Not that I'm aware of; she's one of them!

[Kamaji]

Not that I'm aware of; she's one of them!

[christian]

If America wants to go back to peace and power, turn our oil back on to deny Putin our dollars and energize Americas economy, not impoverish us and weaken us as Biden has done and is stubbornly doing.
Biden has proven in MANY ways he is pro-soviet union, anti-America.

[240B]

Does she ever criticize Democrats?

She is in the Mitt Romney camp of turncoat Republicans. Every horrible disastrous thing Democrats do (free crack pipes) is the Golden Word from Heaven above.

Everything Republicans do (school board reform, support the truckers) is the work of Satan and can never be redeemed.

These are far-Left loony Democrat Communists pretending to be Republicans. One, they want to fill a Republican seat with a Democrat. Two, they think it sounds better for fake Republicans to trash other Republicans. And three, every harebrained crazyass thing the Democrats do, they will jump on board to call it "bipartisan".

There are several politicians calling themselves "Republican" specifically so they can attack the Republican Party from the inside. These are duplicitous lying sneaking saboteurs with no sense of dignity or honor.

[LMAO]

Not that I'm aware of; she's one of them!

Liz Cheney is light-years from being a Democrat based on her voting record. If she wins her primary, she will be reelected easily and would be a solid conservative vote in the HOR

She’s just enjoying the  pat on the back from the media not realizing that they would happily paint her as the next Mrs. Hitler after she serves her purpose

[LMAO]

The US is helping finance Russia's invasion of Ukraine by purchasing their oil. Traitor Joe is too stupid to understand any of that. Traitor Joe and the whole DCP have no clue why this happened or how to solve it.

Should Biden return to the Trump policy of energy independence, it would provide some relief at the pump and weaken Putin

So why doesn’t he do it? Because avoiding the wrath of the Sanders/AOC wing of the party is more important

[mountaineer]

But thank goodness for Joe Biden, eh, Lizzie?

American Greatness
The Crowded Road to Kyiv
To retain our deterrence abroad, we must tighten our belts at home, pump oil and gas, start to balance our budget, junk wokeism as a nihilist indulgence, and recalibrate our military.
By Victor Davis Hanson
February 27, 2022

One of the oddest commentaries about the Russian invasion of Ukraine is the boilerplate reaction that “borders can’t change in modern Europe” or “this does not happen in the 21st century.”

But why in the world should the 21st century be exempt from the pathologies of the past 20 centuries? Are we smarter than the Romans? More innovative than Florentines? Do we have more savvy leaders than Lincoln or Churchill? Are they more mellifluous than Demosthenes? Does anyone now remember that some 130,000 were slaughtered just 30 years ago in the former Yugoslavia, as NATO planes bombed Belgrade and nuclear America and Russia almost squared off?  ...

Gas and oil, and thus who tried to curtail both, explain a lot of the current mess. The nihilist Biden decision voluntarily to cancel new pipelines, federal leases, ANWAR, and leverage loss of bank financing for fracking, and to give up well over 2 million barrels of daily production will be seen not just as an economic disaster. It was a strategic catastrophe.

When Europe, or indeed the West, is dependent on Russian goodwill to drive and keep warm, it can never be free. Ending American energy independence is not just an AOC obsession. Russian hackers in January targeted our Colonial pipeline, shutting down in a day over 1 million barrels of transported oil. The more we discount the strategic consequences of having or lacking oil, the more our enemies fixate on it.

A couple of questions for Joe Biden: Before he took office, was the United States begging Russia to sell it more oil? After he took office, why was it?

Why did Biden blow-up energy dependence? Could not tomorrow Biden reverse course, greenlight the Keystone pipeline, reverse his mindless opposition to the EastMed pipeline that would help allies Cyprus, Greece, and Israel to help other allies in southern Europe, and throw open new federal leasing to supply exports of liquid natural gas to Europe?

What is moral, and what amoral: alienating Bernie Sanders and the squad or keeping our allies and ourselves safe from foreign attack? What is so ethical about following the green advice of billionaires like global jet-setter John Kerry at the expense of the middling classes who cannot afford to drive their cars or warm their living rooms?  ...

Restore the soul of America, my Aunt Fanny.

[Kamaji]

Should Biden return to the Trump policy of energy independence, it would provide some relief at the pump and weaken Putin

So why doesn’t he do it? Because avoiding the wrath of the Sanders/AOC wing of the party is more important

[christian]

After the vicious attacks Trump was forced to endure while in office and afterward.  No political stooge should have the nerve to attack him anymore, their track record as blind lockstepping Lewinskys speaks for itself.  Cowardly dogs that like a chihuahuas that attacks from the dark, the ankles, and runs.

[GtHawk]

Why would I listen to warmongering globalists who want to send our soldiers everywhere in the world there's a conflict so that they can die for absolutely nothing?

Not die for nothing, they send our soldiers to die for profits. They don't care about the conflicts and they sure as hell don't care about our soldiers and their families, I might believe they did even a tiny bit if they didn't treat illegals better than them.

[GtHawk]

Does she ever criticize Democrats?

Of course not, birds of a feather and all.