Media honesty

How do you feel about Donald Trump being less of a war monger than Barack Obama despite what the media said in 2016 about how he would cause WW3?

 

I am a center-right corporate tool no different from Nancy Pelsoi, Paul Ryan, Bill Clinton, or Rahm Emmanuel.

 

Half-true.

Trump has initiated more drone-strikes in his first term as President than Barack Obama did in his entire eight years. All without congressional approval, mind you.

However, I give him credit for opening communication with North Korea. However, he worsened relations with Cuba and that was a terrible move, stoked conflict with Iran, and sells weapons to Saudi Arabia as they invade yemen.

 

I'm not on the strategic level so my words don't carry much weight but I don't think he has done bad overall as commander and chief. He helped build peace between Arabs and Israelis to what extent is unknown to me. He wants to pull out of Germany which is good. Selling arms to Taiwan. Decoupling the US from the Chinese economy. Space force sounds cool but I would like us to have space marines. All good things.

 

With respect to the Israeli-Palestinian situation Trump is a Zionist. He supports Israel and seems to support a one-state solution. I agree with his actions with respect to Israel. That said, he has no clue about this topic. He's supremely uneducated in most respects.

Like Trump, like Mitt Romney, like John McCain, I am a Zionist. If you prefer that one-state approach to a two-state solution, that's fine. However, keep in mind the Palestinian authorities want a two-state solution.

I don't think we should pull our troops out of any of our allied countries. That's exactly what Putin wants at the moment.

I don't mind arms being sold to Taiwan, I like Taiwan. I'm also not a protectionist so I largely support American trade with China but would support increased sanctions to effectively address human rights violations.

I like Space Marines.

 

The Emperor Protects!

 

His foreign policy is bipolar and awful with respect to Iran though, honestly, I think it threatens the health of civilization.

 

@Hostarius

Look at my nuanced foreign policy opinions, see? I do try. I'm not just shit-posting.

 

Basically, in certain respects Trump is more of a "war-monger" than President Obama.

 

I sense more bias in this thread than the lamestream media. It’s called the hostile media effect and this thread is bursting at the seams with it.

Can you please cite some specific examples of this? Namely, I need to see evidence that a major news bureau like NBC News, NYTimes, WaPo, etc. official stance was exactly this position. Opinion pieces do not count as they are the views of the author and not the publisher. Please list the URLs. I’ll be waiting. Thanks.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/4974241/donald-trump-bob-corker-republican-party/?amp=true


https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/national-security/354994-this-is-how-trump-could-start-world-war-iii?amp


https://www.google.com/amp/s/psmag.com/.amp/news/trump-dragging-united-states-to-brink-of-war

 

That's good, but carry on making sense and you might get less high-fives from @Wyote

 

The very first article was a factual account of Bob Corker, a Republican (not a major news bureau) saying he could lead the country into WW3.

Not a good look for you so far.

 

cool.

 

Sorry about coming at you like that. It’s simply the inner debater in me. I’ve been doing it a very long time now, since I was a teenager and I’m 31 now.

You’re new here just like me. The first thing that you want to do is establish your credibility when jumping in discussions like these. Instead, you simply went Googling for headlines that seemingly prove your narrative without even reading them. You went and proved OP’s point about cherry-picking things. You even posted something that goes against your narrative since liberal Marxist commie George Soros funded Bob Corker bucked his party in that Times article. Along with a few others in here, you’ve demonstrated a shallow understanding of how journalism works.

 

Anyways, I wish people would stop conflating op-eds with the news bureau and publisher that publishes them.

For those that are unaware of how journalism works in the West, if you want to know the view of the news bureau in question, you need to look for editorials. Not op-eds. Most especially those written by the entire editorial board. Like this one.

Also, yes news publishers on print and television do have an agenda, but it’s not the totally nefarious one that many on the right and some on the left are speculating it is. They’re simply publishing stories that they think their audience will care about. Nationally significant stories get published by CNN, WaPo, NYTimes, etc. and then you have your local papers and TV stations that publish stories that are locally significant to its local audience. Advertising revenue and subscription fees are what they care about. Nothing more, nothing less.