>>So now this situation with North Korea seems to be getting rather serious - and I don't have much faith in Trump's ability to deal with the situation without starting WW3. Quite alarming. SURELY folks don't still think voting for him was not a mistake and that HRC was the obvious better pick? Like whats it gonna take? A nuke goin off in populated area or what?
>>I do not think he will last the 4 years of his term - just hope the rest of us do.
>
>
>Victor, regardless of whether this country elected Trump or HRC, North Korea would still be making miniaturized nuclear warheads, testing ballistic missiles capable of hitting the U.S., threatening to use them, and would still be planning more tests. Regardless of Trump's flaws, he's not the problem here.

With you on that account. HRC would have tried other ways and threatened other areas but China is the interesting 3rd player and would not have moved more under HRC.

>
>This is a classic example of "blame America first"

Trumps "America first" will hurt the States in the long run if the motto is used as guidance for more terms of office.
Smart people will move their business elsewhere, if such principle is always part of the contract. And yes, I wrote a few months back that most european states should raise their military budget (and not try to sell money/aid in some areas as equally counting "deescalation", as some try over here) and still think that way. Trump definately has identified more than a few valid grievances typically not spoken about in the PC circles.

But trying to be an uncalculateble vector when trying to reach a deal and lying (inflating own position and afterwards trying to redefne terms) might work in house contracting work, where an ocean of interested contractors might try working with him, but the pool of available partners / subcontractors on his current level is smaller by several degrees.

So for me the "America first" ***is*** to blame (in part at least)