Is Trump still a "bad man"?

I'm just wondering if people's opinion of the "great orange one" is still as bad after he brokered the Arab Israeli diplomatic agreements?

I think that maybe the world might be a little bit safer now?

What say you?

Reply 1

Napp

It is unchanged.
Whilst he gets some very, very mild props for getting them to formalise this, that is all that has happened. They have done nothing but codify what has been SOP for a while now. And no, it is no safer to be honest. The countries werent at war and have been 'getting along' quite well for a while. As far as changes go not much has happened.

Now if he gets the Israelis and Palestinians to the peace table he'll get some respect. This is nothing more than low hanging fruit though and one which might well fall apart if the Israelis welsh on their part of the deal with the F35's.

Reply 2

Just my opinion

He could find the cure for cancer and people would accuse him of racism for not curing sickle cell anemia first.

Reply 3

Napp

Original post by Just my opinion

He could find the cure for cancer and people would accuse him of racism for not curing sickle cell anemia first.

In fairness he can hardly complain about this state of affairs, it's always been a truism for people in positions of authority that they can do no ill for their supporters and do no good for their detractors.

Reply 4

username1799249

Original post by Just my opinion

He could find the cure for cancer and people would accuse him of racism for not curing sickle cell anemia first.

Except he never would find a cure for cancer mainly because he doesn't know what cancer is, and if he did, he would try and cure it with bleach hence killing or hospitalising a good thousand or so of his stupidest followers.

Reply 5

Gundabad(good)

Original post by JohnnyHK

The Orange One has gotten worse, not better.

Reply 6

JohnnyHK

Original post by Gundabad(good)

The Orange One has gotten worse, not better.

So he's "bad", but in what way?

Reply 7

Just my opinion

Gets popcorn....sits down. 🙄

Reply 8

AW_1983

Original post by JohnnyHK

I don't think it will make a lot of difference. The Camp David Accords did nothing for Carter in 1980, and this will do nothing for Trump.

His record is so poor that his involvement in a negotiation largely pushed by the Arabs and Israelis will be seen for what it is: piggybacking.

Reply 9

Napp

Original post by AW_1983

They've been getting along well for some time now, all the reports on this say it was Trump and his odious son in law who pushed for this to be codified.

Reply 10

Gundabad(good)

Original post by JohnnyHK

So he's "bad", but in what way?

Just a nasty piece of work that's doing anything he can to not get prosecuted.

Reply 11

JohnnyHK

Original post by Gundabad(good)

Just a nasty piece of work that's doing anything he can to not get prosecuted.

Any non-generic specifics?

Reply 12

Gundabad(good)

Trump really is an ignorant man, who doesn't have the skills nor the finesse to run a country that works for everyone.

Reply 13

iNeed2p

Original post by JohnnyHK

least he is not hypocrite.

Reply 14

PTMalewski

Unlike his precedessors he doesn't start or trigger wars. The rest is relatively irrelevant.

Reply 15

anarchism101

Original post by PTMalewski

Unlike his precedessors he doesn't start or trigger wars. The rest is relatively irrelevant.

Not for lack of trying. He very nearly walked right into wars with Iran and North Korea.

Reply 16

PTMalewski

Original post by anarchism101

Not for lack of trying. He very nearly walked right into wars with Iran and North Korea.

After he made the greatest improvement in relations. Let's be serious, NK wouldn't fight back even if you bombed their capital city. The truth is, it's in nobody's interested to destroy the regime, that's the only reason this parody of a country exists.

Reply 17

anarchism101

Original post by PTMalewski

After he made the greatest improvement in relations.

Which came largely from him just handing over several concessions to North Korea in exchange for... nothing. If you say he avoided war - he was the reason there was a serious risk of war in the first place!

Let's be serious, NK wouldn't fight back even if you bombed their capital city.

Erm, they have nuclear weapons and ICBMs, of course they'd fight back. They'd lose, of course, but they could inflict hundreds of thousands if not millions of deaths on their opponents.

Reply 18

JohnnyHK

Original post by anarchism101

Not for lack of trying. He very nearly walked right into wars with Iran and North Korea.

Standing up to and facing down terrorists is not really "walking into a war" is it? It's more a matter of preventing them - especially in he case of Iran.

If the US had faced down a resurgent Germany in the 1930s maybe WW2 wouldn't have happened?

Reply 19

PTMalewski

Original post by anarchism101

Erm, they have nuclear weapons and ICBMs, of course they'd fight back. They'd lose, of course, but they could inflict hundreds of thousands if not millions of deaths on their opponents.

Ten years ago they didn't even have a bomb small enough to fit into a rocket, and the best their ECBM's could achieve was to get drowned in the ocean much sooner than expected. It's in nobody's interest to attack North Korea, even if all they had were wooden sticks, that's why there is no and there won't be any war. It's even more than the situation in the Eastern Europe. It's not like anyone there could repell the Russian invasion. Poland would be defeated before the local army command could realise the country has been attacked. The only reason why Russia won't move further to the West is because it makes no sense for them.