Donald Trump and the New World

Vasu Reddy from Chicago
vasureddy@aol.com

While Donald Trump has a lot of bluster and illogical comments (notwithstanding the nasty discussion on women, minorities, religion, law, jobs, trade, beauty and money) in his normal campaign day, he does make some very legitimate concerns of Americans come to the public forum.  While the republican party he is currently representing is going all out to deny him their party’s nomination, he is garnering enough support and attention from the republicans and the media to keep ahead of the others vying for the party’s nomination.

It’s no guarantee that he will be the Republican Party’s nominee as of today (28 March 2016), but it looks increasingly certain that Trump will be the republican nominee for president in the upcoming November 2016, US presidential race.

There is a lot of fodder for networks, internet and the political junkies.  The reality shows are constant and no one knows what the republicans will do next.  If you like television and uncertainty of politics, Trump is 100% entertaining in this election cycle.

If the political wisdom comes to fore, and Hillary Clinton is the democratic nominee, this election seems fairly routine.  Mrs. Clinton will probably be the first Madame President of the USA.

Going back to Trump and his blusterous candidacy while it still is going great, there are serious issues that every American has, and he makes them his main points of discussion.  His support is primarily feeding to the American psyche and relating to the country and the rest of the world.  We should give credit to the current administration and their efforts along with other global leaders in their efforts to address and tackle these issues.  It is likely that they don’t feel the pressure of an election to highlight the same, but nevertheless they are serious and concerning issues, and Trump is trumpeting them as his election manifesto, and also gaining a substantial section of the American electorate to listen and vote for him.

His position on reorganizing the alliances makes sense.  We are no longer live with communist verses democratic nations.  The old USSR doesn’t exist, and NATO is a relic of the II world war with a different set of nations and priorities.  USA is also not a nation with excessive funds to keep paying for security of the world without each of those nations paying for receiving the benefit of the US Army.  USA continues its budget deficits (getting huge every minute without a plan to cut) and has not been able to keep up with ever expanding costs.

USA also along with its allies is always reacting, and most times a bit too late to any situation.  The nation can become proactive, or leave the issues alone.  The past generation is a great testament to the failed polices of intervention.  Not one single nation where USA is militarily involved likes the intervention, nor any of the countries have become self-reliant.  They have gone from dictatorship to total chaos and war zones.  So, the WW II model where Europe getting help and becoming a well-organized set of nations, is not happening now.  If a nation will not become a self-governing and democratic society, then no amount of intervention will help.

Trump’s point on sharing the burden of global policing and monitoring is a fair international policy.  Nations should recognize that anyone who is helping needs to be compensated, unless it is a humanitarian cause.  In the case of NATO, Korea and several MEA nations, USA should ask its partners to pay a fair share.

Some of the supposedly good Samaritan deeds of the USA have only created a backlash against the Americans and American interests.  ISIS, Taliban, Al Qaeda, radicals and various organizations which have surfaced only to attack American policies and interests.  While the Americans think they are helping, the creation of these radical and extremist groups continuously proves otherwise.

Most of the terror is unleashed on civilians and public places.  People going about their routines are being targeted constantly by these radicals, purely to disrupt a way of life that is routine and uncomplicated in democracies.  Because of the communications and transportation, a few people are able to disrupt people across the globe, and that too for a cause that is of no concern to the people that they are suicide bombing.  Public places have become easy targets for radicals.

The suicide bombers are constantly attacking crowded places taking down scores of innocents.  They also destroy infrastructure and create fear among the public, and add huge pressure on the police and other services.  The irony is that most of these attacks are happening in places that have embraced these radicals and given them a home and life.  It is difficult to guess what makes a suicide bomber from a normal community?  Killing in the name of what?

Trump successfully speaks to the fear of the nation.  The bombing are becoming more common place in the western societies.  More and more MEA nations are under turmoil.  Many more nations are taking the bombings on a regular basis.

There is no clear path to isolating the radicals and stopping the carnage.  So, playing the touch cop role will get attention.  Trump is capitalizing on this, and rightfully so.  People who live in democracies don’t want disruptions, and debt burden.  Today Americans increasingly are burdened with both, and the current leadership is incapable of handling these and finding lasting solutions.  And when someone on a national stage (perhaps as the next president) speaks to eliminating these fears, people will listen.