Did Jimmy Carter or Donald Trump Abandon Henry Kissinger?

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Jacob E Mack, Nov 13, 2019.

  1. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    The Middle Eastern policy under Trump appears to some, to be a sharp deviation from the policies and diplomacy enacted by Henry Kissinger the Secretary of State between September 23, 1973 - January 20, 1977. Under Trump, some would claim, the US has caved to interests of Israel, along with Saudi Arabia and allowed them to exercise undue power over Iran.

    Others make the claim that it was Jimmy Carter who left Kissinger's legacy behind with his deep interest in incorporating Palestinean interests deep into US policy, and in trying to democratize Iran, but falling short of true support of the Shah, he failed in terms of artful diplomacy.

    Others have observed that a two-state solution is impossible, but the one-state democratic solution is a failure as well, others observe.

    My questions are:

    1.) Was Jimmy Carter, or is Donald Trump more in line with Kissinger's legacy?

    2.) Is the Kissinger legacy even a legitimate thing to consider?
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2019
  2. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't know who abandoned Kissinger, but it should have been done a very long time ago.
     
  3. FivepointFive

    FivepointFive Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,754
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Trump is in line?? with anything?? we have ever seen??

    [​IMG]
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  4. FivepointFive

    FivepointFive Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,754
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah Jared Kushner can sell middle east peace allright...
    Israel and Gaza are going at it as we type.

    Kissinger is quite irrelevant from my perspective.. There was no transparency ike there is now then.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2019
    Eleuthera and Jacob E Mack like this.
  5. Observing

    Observing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    910
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who ever abandoned Kissinger first would be the winner in my book. Other than his idea of bringing in china as an fulcrum against the USSR, his policies are that of an interventionist that was willing to trade American lives for corporate profits.
     
    Eleuthera and Jacob E Mack like this.
  6. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    9,281
    Likes Received:
    2,780
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Trump is more in-line with Kissinger's geo-politics based on the British foreign policy of the 19th century. Carter was more the "moralist." Israel has never been an "existential issue" for the United States. Kissinger was much more focused on super-power relationships. The Israeli-Palestinian issue, although important, was essentially a side-show for Nixon and Kissinger.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2019
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  7. Doug1943

    Doug1943 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2015
    Messages:
    3,741
    Likes Received:
    1,748
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think it's problematic to try to ascribe any coherent foreign policy view to Mr Trump. Even the heavy thinkers in this field don't seem to have a consensus with respect to a Grand Strategy for America. So whatever Trump does from one day to the next is probably just the vector sum of various impulses, pressures, suggestions, irritations, etc, hopefully constrained by the adults around him. (I'm so happy Mr Bolton is goine.)

    And there is a big problem, that would face even the most brilliant, knowledgeable, wise American leader: it's an objective one. Namely, within two or three decades, America is no longer going to be Number One in the world. Our place will be taken by China.

    Even if America survives as a single, essentially American republic -- which is very doubtful -- it will still be Number Two. It can be a strong Number Two, allied with several strong Number Threes and Fours. And China will find, as America found when it was Number One, being Number One doesn't mean you can always get your way. Hopefully, we will all jostle along together, while we collectively continue to make the sort of economic and technical progress that marked the 20th Century. Advances in genetic engineering alone promise a bright future, if we can keep from killing ourselves in a big war.

    However, current deep social/political developments in the United States suggest, to me anyway, that the US is, relatively soon, going to undergo some form of traumatic distintegration, so that the fragments of America that emerge won't even be Number Two in the world. But no one knows the future.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  8. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Thank you all for the replies thus far. My question stems from an ongoing debate among scholars and pundits. The specific question was inspired by the spirit of the latest issue of Foreign Affairs. I would copy and paste some highlights but I can only view on my app on my phone at this time. I am fascinated too that Hillary Clinton in her last election campaign compared herself to Kissinger and his legacy, but Foreign Affairs makes no mention of this.

    I often see Kissinger depicted as victor and villain, greedy globalist, and global peacemaker; greedy interventionist, and humanitarian.

    Obviously, people are typically multi-faceted and complex, and contradictions or paradoxes abound... since most scholars and pundits agree Kissinger was a kind of interventionist, however, is it fair to say Trump follows at all in his footsteps? Carter seems to me to have been a half-assed interventionist, almost as bad as JFK.
     
  9. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    9,281
    Likes Received:
    2,780
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Kissinger made several trips to candidate Trump's headquarters at Trump Tower, in NYC, to offer advice. Presumably, that advice was not about building condos or golf courses. Based on photographic evidence, he was the person meeting with Trump, in the Oval Office, immediately preceding the visit of the Russian Foreign Minister and the Russian Ambassador, the day following the firing of Comey.

    Kissinger's doctoral thesis was based on the British foreign policy of the 19th century when, following Napoleon's defeat, the involved nations of Europe gathered at the Congress of Vienna and established a "peace" that lasted, with a few exceptions, a hundred years, until WW I. Key to that arrangement was British foreign policy that required the British to ally with the second most powerful European continental power, in order to prevent the strongest continental power from moving against Britain. This was the "balance of power," "realpolitik" Kissinger advocated.

    And, as Nixon's principal foreign policy advisor, he implemented this "balance of power," by "opening" China and splitting the Sino-Soviet Bloc, which helped end the Vietnam War, and eventually brought down the USSR, which at that time was the primary opposing super-power. Reagan, basically continued this policy through U.S. defense spending, which forced the USSR to try and keep pace. When they could not, detente ensued, followed by the break-up of the USSR.

    Today, the situation is similar, but China is in the superpower position that the USSR use to occupy. Kissinger's advice would presumably be to do basically the same thing, but with the different actors - i.e. a new U.S.-Russian alliance to oppose the growing influence and global power of China. My theory is that new alliance would be based on oil and take the form of a new OPEC, composed of the old OPEC, plus Russia and the U.S., led by us, the Russians and Saudi Arabia. Together, this cartel would influence, if not outright control, global fossil fuel energy prices. The result of that influence/control would force nation's importing such energy to devote more of their GDP toward energy costs and, as a result, less of their GDP on defense and domestic growth.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2019
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  10. straight ahead

    straight ahead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Messages:
    5,647
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Donald Trump abandoned Henry Kissinger?

    Certainly one of the more bizarre posts here in quite a while.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  11. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    How so? Just curious. This is a serious discussion among foreign policy and international affairs experts regarding Kissinger's legacy. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with either side, but it's an important discussion in the Foreign Affairs professional and research areas.
     
  12. straight ahead

    straight ahead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Messages:
    5,647
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    Trophy Points:
    113

    How can you abandon someone you that have absolutely nothing to do with? Are you going to rate every president's loyalty record vs the policy of every government official in history? This is the United States of America, not the United States of Henry Kissinger.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  13. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I am not referring to loyalty and by abandon I mean abandoning that legacy of policy making or philosophy. I am just curious what others think about the influence of Kissinger over time.
     
  14. Jeannette

    Jeannette Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    37,994
    Likes Received:
    7,948
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I don't know what Kissinger's legacy is, but I know that during Nixon's impeachment he had charge of our foreign policy and allowed Turkey to invade and take over half of Cyprus.

    When the Republicans realized they lost the election to Carter because they were short the amount of money contributed by the Greeks, no one would touch him with a ten foot pole. Kissinger never held a public office since then.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  15. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks
     
  16. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Good input
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2019
  17. straight ahead

    straight ahead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Messages:
    5,647
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of all the reasons Ford lost to Carter, missing Greek money was not in the top 100.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  18. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    How so?
     
  19. straight ahead

    straight ahead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Messages:
    5,647
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How so? Without researching it, tell me who Greek Americans supported in the last ten presidential elections. Politically they're irrelevant. Ford lost because he was never elected, pardoned Nixon, and presided over a bad economy.
     
    Wrathful_Buddha and Jacob E Mack like this.
  20. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    According to survey research Greek Americans were more likely to be Conservative by far than Democrat or Independent in the 1970s, as Republicans back then tended to be more centrist. Research also shows Nixon alienated Greeks and Turks...this led to a change in voting behavior later on.

    Yes, Ford was pretty bad, but as smart as Nixon was. His paranoia ruined his Administration and turned Greek American voters.

    Ofcourse I'm going to look it up and do research.

    Then why did Kissinger never hold public office after Nixon?
     
  21. Jeannette

    Jeannette Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    37,994
    Likes Received:
    7,948
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    It's a little too late. The US should have befriended Vladimir Putin years ago and worked with Russia to help develop its assets, instead they kept trying to force a regime change so they could rob Russia like they did in the 90's.

    Putin and Xi are very close, and the two countries are intertwined today in more ways than one - and they have Washington, the EU and the deep state's sanctions to thank for it. In Washington's and the EU's delusional minds, they thought Putin and Russia as a whole, looked upon the West so highly, that they would have done anything to become part of it.

    Well they were wrong - and the West has always been wrong when it came to Russia.
     
  22. straight ahead

    straight ahead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Messages:
    5,647
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm assuming you mean a governmental position because Henry Kissinger was never elected to public office. Kissinger never served in government after the 1970's but I believed he unofficially advised presidents for at least 30 years after he was Secretary of State.
     
    Jeannette and Jacob E Mack like this.
  23. Jacob E Mack

    Jacob E Mack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I meant to say he never worked directly in government again.

    He worked in the private sector, in Universities, and advised Presidents but he did not work directly in government again.

    Either way I find his biography and legacy interesting.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2019
  24. Jeannette

    Jeannette Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    37,994
    Likes Received:
    7,948
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Kissinger told Pres. Ford when he lost the election, that their mistake was that they didn't take the Greek Americans into account.

    After the Turkish invasion, Pres. Ford said on TV that Turkey had always been a great ally - which was a lie since they always sided with Germany. At that moment the camera turned towards Henry Kissinger and showed him smiling. I saw it, and the rest of the country saw it, and the rest is history. He never again held a government position.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.
  25. Jeannette

    Jeannette Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    37,994
    Likes Received:
    7,948
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Kissinger probably did advise presidents or others somewhat, but it would have been secretly - or at least I think it would have been.
     
    Jacob E Mack likes this.

Share This Page