tv Legal View With Ashleigh Banfield CNN April 27, 2016 9:00am-10:01am PDT
policy team member just a few moments ago who said that donald trump will be laying out what he described as a departure not only from the obama doctrine but the bush doctrine. you have to take a look at a couple of things about being against the iraq war in 2003 and being against the iran nuclear deal as evidence of that. obviously, donald trump has talked about a lot of different things on the campaign trail which has raised eyebrows. among his foreign policy proposals or proposals with foreign policy implications, he's talked about temporarily banning all muslims into the united states. he's talked about building a wall on the u.s. mexican border, deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants. taking out the families of terrorists in strikes on isis. and then renegotiate trade deals in asia that could have major ripple effects around the world. we should point out that donald trump was on cnn's new day earlier this morning talking about what he's going to be laying out in this foreign
policy speech. we don't expect him to offer a lot of specifics but asked donald trump whether he endorses the president's current plan to send in 250 additional special operations forces into syria to take on isis and donald trump did not immediately trash the idea. he said, it's an idea he could support with one qualification. here's what he had to say. >> i don't agree with telling it to the world. i would send them in quietly because right now, they have a target on their back. so i would agree with it much more. i don't know what purpose they're being sent in for but i would agree with it. i could live with it. but i don't like doing is sending them in so, i mean, with such fanfare. let them go in, let them go in quietly and be unpredictable. you know, from my standpoint, i find it hard that every time we do something, we announce it for publicity reasons and i think that's very negative. i think that's a bad thing.
>> we should point out, wolf, there's some interesting people expected to be in attendance for this. not only the full display of donald trump's national security team but senator jeff sessions who is a prominent endorser and surrogate for donald trump. we expect him to be here according to donald trump's national security team. i'm seeing the former congressman bob livingston here, he was almost the speaker of the house. as you know, wolf, he's endorsing donald trump, and there are people from academia, from the military who are all endorsing and supporting donald trump's campaign and one other thing we'll hear in the speech i want to point out and it goes to this issue of dealing with russia. as you know, wolf, president obama has not been a big fan of the idea of working with russia, working with vladimir putin to go after isis through counterterrorism operations. apparently during the speech, we may hear donald trump talk about doing just that. so talk about policies,
specifically that we have not heard a lot of during the course of the campaign. that might be one of them with donald trump during the course of the speech. of course, you know, we'll be listening in closely to hear exactly what donald trump has to lay out over the next 30 to 45 minutes. but given what we heard last night, donald trump was not exactly toning it down in terms of his rhetoric at that victory speech in new york. perhaps that tone will be a bit more measured in what we're about to hear in a few moments from now, wolf. >> the campaign, jim, said this is the first of several scripted policy speeches, foreign policy, domestic policy speeches, he's going to be delivering over the next several weeks to lay out his vision for a trump administration, if you will. is that right? >> reporter: that's right. we heard donald trump talk about his policy when it comes to israel and palestine. that was at aipac earlier this
year but we'll hear a major speech about the economy and last night during his victory speech in new york, the economic policies that he's talking about during the course of this campaign also with his foreign policy and ripping up trade deals in china and imposing tariffs on goods imported from mexico by companies based in united states. not just economic policies but they are going to have major diplomatic and foreign policy implications. from what donald trump has talked about so far in just dealing with mexico has to have a lot of people on edge over at the state department, wolf. because that is going to be a major departure from what the obama administration has been pursuing over the last eight years, wolf. >> in washington, we're awaiting the start of donald trump's speech. we'll see who introduces him over there and get back to you, jim. stand by. i want to get a political assessment of what's going on right now. gloria borger, this is a clear effort by the trump campaign to
show a more presidential side of this candidate. >> right. and i think they understand he's not only been attacked by hillary clinton on his foreign policy views and that if he becomes the nominee, he would run a former secretary of state and contains certain vulnerabilities but certain strengths and he's also been under attack by his own republican party on not only issues like trade, but issues like bombing isis, for example, issues like iraq. the neoconservative wing believes that was the right decision and he believes that was the wrong decision to go to iraq. on china, nato. everything from on nukes because he wants to, thinks it wouldn't be a bad idea if japan and south korea had nukes. immigration and temporary ban on muslims and i'm not sure there's anything he in either the establishment or the neocon wing of the republican really agree on. you could probably speak to that. >> it's interesting following
his five big wins yesterday. we did the ma our political unit. he's now winning, trump, in the popular vote in all of the contest states that have taken place by about 3 million. he's got over 10 million votes. cruz has got 6,850,000 and kasich only 3,674,000. and up by 400 or so delegates. the all important delegate count. the republican establishment increasingly coming around to this notion he might be their nominee. >> the establishment, i think, probably. i think probably the better way to answer that it depends who you consider a part of the establishment and what you consider coming around. whether or not they're really there or they're still in a bit of denial because there certainly is still that never trump movement that they're going to put ads on tv in indiana and continue to try to
stop him. however, i think the numbers you just talked about, the fact he did so overwhelmingly well last night in these states, it kind of crystallizes things for people and makes the opponents to donald trump very frustrated. just one quick thing i want to say on the foreign policy. i think that part of what has driven the support of donald trump isn't just like the "make america great" brand and things like that but also that he sounds very popular and transfers to foreign policy. you've got to do things at home first. why are the roads and bridges bad? why do we spend money at first and so forth? that does appeal very much to a wing of the republican party that maybe felt their party in washington, i don't know what you think, congressman, was not getting it. they were so eager to be the
world's policemen. they were spending money left and right. what about us? >> i think he will lay out what some are calling, maybe not an isolationist policy but more of a non-interventionist policy. you know, other countries in the world, let them the job done. we have pressing business here at home. >> i think his goal is to at least try to take away that he is not ready for the foreign policy piece of the attack. and i think that's exactly why he started on foreign policy. everybody knows it's important. it's rising in voter appeal as far as candidates who can step in and handle that position. so i think this is a blocking and tackling speech. if he can stick to it, i think he can lay out a plan that gets at least tempers some of the doubt. >> i want to bring fareed into this conversation and nick also. you are fascinated by the united states. a lot at stake.
what are people around the world saying, fareed? what are they feeling when they see this presidential contest unfold? and it now looks like trump has an excellent chance of being the republican nominee. >> they're very worried. i had the italian prime minister on my show and flat out endorsed hillary clinton saying from markets fear and that is the way in which he is risen to prominence, we don't like this at all. i think it's important to point out, trump's rise to prominence is on foreign policy. that is to say it is the wall with mexico that began trump's rise to prom neninence and accelerated with the issue of the ban against muslims. so he's been playing foreign policy all along. what he has recognized is that there is a very large group of americans who feel with a
jacksonian. these enemies and allies are to be deeply distrusted. we need what we need to do unilaterally. i don't think isolationist but say we need to defeat isis and beat up the bad guys. but then go home. in other words, no nation building. no policing. no engagement. no alliances. and there's a very deep strain of american politics, andrew jackson being a prominent part of it, that have often always felt like this and what trump has found is he sttapped into tt vein in the broader public. it is deeply responsible because actually can't engage in the world that way. you can't find a path to prosperity or security in that way. but it does appeal to people's gut instinct that is, why do we have to make all these deals with other countries? why do we have to work? can't we just go in guns blazing and beat up the bad guys and go home? >> it's interesting.
i want to bring in nick robertson in this. saudi rarabia. how are they viewing donald trump? >> a lot of skepticism, wolf. he's called on various times, big contributors towards global terrorism. yet in terms of how he's described aipac in particular how he would deal with iran, they might see a lot attractive in that for them. but, you know, i think fundamentally, the saudis and the gulf allies are in sort of a position where it doesn't really matter what the next u.s. president is going to do and say. they're on their own path. absolutely, they're interested in what trump has said particularly, his comments about muslims. i think this notion that block and tackle here that this is a speech that kind of can diffuse some of the criticism that may
come from hillary clinton. i mean, look at what the british prime minister said about donald trump's views on muslims. he's called them divisive, wrong, and stupid. there's been a lot of condemnation from leaders around the world. the pope's condemned the talk of the wall. trump should be building bridges. the only person who's spoken positively has been the russian president, vladimir putin who called him outstanding and talented. i mean, how can any of that, putin on one hand, kremlin on the other, stack up well in a debate on foreign policy? it doesn't look good. so this speech, while leaders while cameron and putin look for details to aim at domestic politics, but how it echoes back from them, how we hear comments from the international leaders is certainly going to be important as this campaign goes forward. >> the important speech by donald trump. me, this is a group that's sponsoring this speech originally supposed to be the
national press club but needed a bigger location so they moved to theplay flower hotel and conservative think tank in washington. they have a publication of the national interests. pretty well known among conservative circles and underscores the political nature of this. he's trying to reach out to the republican conservative foreign policy elite, if you will, and just say i've got important ideas. >> and he's done some of this. in some ways. he made the speech at aipac and that was the teleprompter speech that sent it out to reporters before he gave it. and also made some foreign policy advisors with long interviews to the new york times and the "washington post" on foreign policy but still, you have the establishment very much worried about where he would go in terms of foreign policy using words like dangerous, using words like unpredictable, and it ought to describe his approach to foreign policy and even in some of the debates, those are big issues, particularly among rubio and lindsey graham, who are more hawkish and more on the
neoconservative realm of the republican establishment. very much trying to draw donald trump out on some of these issues, on the nuclear triad, for instance, showing he didn't know what that is. so, but yeah. i think this is, again, him checking the boxes in some ways, giving signs to the republican establishment that he's ready, that he's learning, right? and that he's making some progress in trying to be thepre party. >> nobody else has done an interview with the new york times on foreign policy so i think you have to give him credit on that. he's been out there with a bunch of his ideas. the problem i think he's had is it's been ad hoc and at times, inconsistent. so if you're going to have a doctrine, it has to be something that is thought through with a certain amount of consistency, rationale and i think that's what he's trying to do today. if you are not for the use of
force, you think it's indiscriminate, you talk about bombing the hell out of isis, people are going to ask questions. okay, which is it? and if you say it going into iraq was a mistake, what would you have done? i think there are questions that need to be answers because he has said so much. >> everyone stand by for a moment. we're going to take a quick break to await donald trump. his speech on national security foreign policy. a carefully drafted speech. people are watching. they're listening. he is the republican presidential front-runner.
i take it he'll be introduced by a former u.s. ambassador to afghanistan and to iraq. is that what you're hearing over there? >> reporter: we are hearing that, wolf. and we're also hearing there are a number of members of foreign policy and national security team here. i met a couple of them before the speech got going here and, you know, some of them are veterans of the reagan administration and go back to previous republican administrations and so what donald trump is ctrying to do a others said a few moments ago, he has the foreign policy. and donald trump said he wants to bomb the hell out of isis and take the oil, it might make the people in the think tank fidget in their seats a bit, out on the campaign trail, lines like that, wolf, are the reason why donald trump racked up the huge victories in the five northeastern victories. people want to hear that kind of rhetoric and want to hear that donald trump wants to bomb the hell out of isis but at the same
time, said he's opposed to the iraq war. how do you square that circle? that's the details people may be wanting but i'm told by advisors, we should not a expect a whole litany of details or specifics. this is broad outlines, a thematic and getting back to some of the things that donald trump has talked about on the campaign trail. you know, he has talked about whether nato is obsolete. he's said nato outlived its current usefulness and needs to be upgraded, perhaps a national security posture and counterterrorism posture, i should say. and those are things that he said, i was right about that issue. you may hear a bit of that as well. sort of a recapping some of the things he's talked about, as fareed said. i suspect you're going to hear a lot of donald trump going back and reviewing some of the things he's talked about during the gop
prima primary. a battle we've seen unfold but a few details here and there that might be interesting or tantalizing working with vladimir putin and russia and maybe involved in the speech. i think that will be very tantalizing to hear. but at the same time, wolf, as some folks saying earlier, what president obama hears from just about every foreign leader around the country, what is going on with donald trump, and i would suspect that a lot of foreign leaders will be watching and paying attention to what donald trump has to say in just a few moments, wolf. >> i think he will make references to russia. he's noted in the past russians want to bomb isis and syria, go ahead. let them do it. let the russians get the job done. stand by. fareed, let's talk about some of the foreign policy positions he's outlined so far. i'll put a few of the headlines he's put out over the last ten months or so. he supports a two-state solution
between israel and palestine. wants two states. and suggested it's caused grief that the u.s. should be neutral between the israelis and hates the iran nuclear deal. said $150 billion for the iranians, and the u.s. got nothing out of that and jim acosta just said, he's suggested obsolete right now.nato may be other countries should be paying more of the price of nato and playing a bigger role. pretty controversial positions. your reaction? >> they are controversial. most particularly the last one because as you know, wolf, on israel, palestine, he started out. he's been all over the place on many of these. he started out suggesting he was going to pressure the israelis and said the kind of usual rhetoric about wanting the two-state solution but on nato,
he has really worried european al lic allies. they're trying to deter the russians to make sure there's no further aggression in ukraine. there's some price that russia has to pay for having that and with the hungarians worried about the actual security with the baltic states asking for further american assurances to have the presumptive nominee say nato is obsolete. the baltic states are banking on nato for their territorial integrity. so it's a very controversial position. on syria, again, you were pointing out, he's been all over the map. once he said, let putin take care of it and the arabs take care of it, we should send 30,000 troops in and part of that is really, he has become a.
it's from their gut. so there are times when it seems like the terrorism is in the news and he'll say, we got to go in and smash them and maybe send in 30,000 troops. when it receives, he said, this is not our problem. let somebody else deal with it. you can do that on the campaign trail, especially totally unscripted form he's doing but not as president because each of these statements has deep consequences with international repercussions and then follow through on your policy. how can you one day say you're in favor of 30,000 ground troops in syria and then the next day say you're in favor of none? you'll have deployed troops at some point. >> good point. i suspect he'll make some reference to that in the speech that's coming up. mike rodgers, you were chair of the house intelligence committee on terrorism. he said all sorts of things and i'll put a few things as he just said, ground troops. at some point, the u.s. may have to deploy but to kill isis and
destroy isis. gone further in saying air strikes, if necessary, if these terrorists are hiding among families, he wouldn't rule out necessarily going out and killing the families of terrorists if necessary to destroy isis and as far as the water boarding policy which some call torture, he said that would be fine and go further. he said isis, they behead people, put them in cages. they drown them. the u.s. can't be tied with one hand behind its back. you heard him say all of that and may get into some of that in his speech. >> i hope so and i think gloria is right. you need some consistency on foreign policy. he suffers from briefings. i'm positive someone said nato isn't paying up their fair share to keep up their percentage as they agreed. he took that, poured gas on it and said nato is obsolete and i'm setting them up to get a deal in that whole exchange. meaning he's going to go get that extra 2% or get them to
meet their 2%. >> a few of the 28 allies in the nato alliance, only a handful meet the threshold and why can't all of them do that? >> what he does is then ramps it up. and i think that's where fareed is exactly right. he takes the pop ewe liyupopuli. nato, you need to meet your minimum obligation and defense needs. he took that position and that briefing and what came out is nato is obsolete and say i'm setting them up for the deal. and i'll get the deal at their 2%. it's dangerous when you do that. it sends really terrible messages to our allies and our adversaries, candidly. and this starts in syria. this fits and starts policy is not working that great. we need the next commander in chief to have a consistent policy. whatever that is, and implement it. he needs to do that if he will gain any of the folks who are
serious about national security he might be able to be okay. >> what he said on new day this morning and on cnn on this notion he should be more presidential. listen to this. >> i'm not going to be changing. i'm presidential anyway. i mean, i can change to presidential, but i'm presidential anyway. >> what does it mean say change to presidential? what do you think presidential is that you're not right now? >> a lower key version and not use any language that would be offensive, but i don't do that anyway. and i feel that i shouldn't be doing that. i was doing that for a period of time for emphasis. but i feel that i shouldn't be doing that. i'm not, you know, i'm not doing that. and i used to make speeches when i was non-political. i used some foul language and it would make things exciting and people would go crazy but when you're running for office, it's a little bit different. >> some of his advisors told him to tone it down a bit. but he's been reluctant to do
so. especially addressing 20,000 people at a stadium some place at a big rally. >> i mean, it's not just about using bad words that you don't want your kids to hear. it's about saying the kind of thing that he said at the end of what was a pretty magnaminous speech. about hillary clinton being a woman. i don't think most presidential candidates or presidents would say that. that's his appeal to his supporters. the non-politically correct. and so on, so forth. but to that, tying this into foreign policy, we're talking about the trump doctrine. he said very explicitly last night that he doesn't want a trump doctrine because he wants to be flexible. he wants to be able to kind of change with the times.
>> you cannot send that message to your allies. maybe we will be with you, maybe we don't. that's why every nato country has expressed concern about his position. they need to understand. if you're the baltic states, if russia comes over the border, are you going to be here? if you have a president that comes in and said, maybe, maybe not. >> but obama was accused of being unpredictable that way as well and not being an ally they can depend on. >> i go back to crossing the red line in syria decision. >> you see a lot of foreign policy officials, academics beginning to sense, this guy may be the republican nominee and they're jumping aboard the ban wagon right now. you'll see who's in the crowd today. not just jeff sessions, an
airliearly supporter of donald trump and he and some former members of his staff are involved in helping donald trump but a whole bunch of other think tankers, academics, former government officials already sensing, you know what? i'm going to join his team because he may potentially be the president. >> that's right. i mean, they see that this is a pool bandwagon leaving the station to mix metaphors and be on board. see if they can be a part of a trump administration or an advisor as he is going about this campaign. they want to see if they can. it's interesting but it will be interesting to see if we see this from elected officials, if they come out publicly. >> introducing donald trump. >> in my recently published memoir, "the envoy," i told the
story of coming from afghanistan to the united states legally -- [ applause ] -- as a teenager and of my latest service and as a u.s. diplomat in afghanistan, iraq, and the united nations, analyzing what we did right and drawing lessons for the future. america gave me an opportunity to succeed and i tried to pay back a little by my service to the united states. i mentioned in my book, i would like everyone to read it and to
borrow a phrase from mr. trump, "it will make your head spin." today, at t as the primaries wi down, donald trump delivers a much anticipated speech on his foreign policy philosophy. this is a critical moment for america and for the world. since the end of world war ii, some 70 years now, the united states has supported a world order that has precluded war among the major powers. we have prevented hostiles from dominating critical regions, asia, europe, and the middle east. we did so by maintaining a
favorable balance of power by creating expanding and sustaining strong alliances and by seeking areas of cooperation and reconciliation with rivals. but war among major powers have been precluded, we have been embroiled in several costly and protective conflict and the world has become more complex and stable and dangerous. one in which rival powers are more aggressive, hostile regimes are pursuing weapons of mass destruction including nuclear m
and cyber capabilities and the threat of terrorism and extremism is acute. indeed, the international order, the state system created by the west is itself under attack by the visionist states and rising powers with alternative concepts of order. as often seen in our history, after a period of great exertion during the first decade of the 21st century post- 9/11, we are now in a period of withdrawal and retreat. and things can still get a lot worse. we have a sluggish economy. growing inequality. rising debt. and debt service. our infrastructure needs attention and the demand for
domestic program is growing. pressure is rising to reduce expenditure on national security at a time when we need to pay more attention to our security needs. against this backdrop, the presidential primaries have shown that our country is deeply conflicted and polarized about america's purpose and mission around the world. mr. trump has been a provocative voice in this debate. his message has resonated with a significant part of our electorate. the national interest has invited mr. trump to elaborate upon his distinctive views about america's role in the world and explain how he would lead
america as commander in chief. he will extend similar invitations to the other candidates. we're delighted mr. trump is here. please join me in welcoming him. thank you very much. [ applause ] >> thank you for the opportunity to speak to you and thank you to the center for national interests for honoring me with this invitation. it truly is a great honor. i'd like to talk today about how to develop a new foreign policy direction for our country. one that replaces randomness with purpose.
ideology with strategy. and chaos with peace. it's time to shake the rust off america's foreign policy. it's time to invite new voices and new visions into the fold. something we have to do. the direction i will outline today will also return us to a timeless principle. my foreign policy always puts the interests of the american people and american security above all else. has to be first. has to be. that will be the foundation of every single decision that i will make. [ applause ] thank you. america first will be the major and overriding theme of my administration. but to chart our path forward, we must first briefly take a look back. we have a lot to be proud of in
the 1940s, we saved the world. the greatest generation beat back the nazis and japanese impeerialis impeerialists. then we saved the world again. this time, from totalitarianism and communism, the cold war, it lasted for decades but guess what, we won and we won big. democrats and republicans working together got mr. gorbichav to heed the words when he said tear down this wall. history will not forget what he did, very special, special man and president. unfortunately, after the cold war, our foreign policy veered badly off course. we failed to develop a new vision for a new time. in fact, as time went on, our
foreign policy began to make less and less sense. logic was replaced with foolishness and arrogance which led to one foreign policy disaster after another. they just kept coming and coming. we went from mistakes in iraq to egypt to libya to president obama's line in the sand in syria. each of these actions have helped to throw the region into chaos and gave isis the space it needs to grow and prosper. very bad. it all began with a dangerous idea that we could make western democracies out of countries that had no experience or interest in becoming a western democracy. we tore up what institutions they had and then we're surprised at what we unleashed. civil war, religious fanaticism, thousands of americans and just
killed lives, lives wasted. horribly wasted. many trillions of dollars were lost as a result. the vacuum was created that isis would fill. iran, too, would rush in and fill that void much to their really unjust enrichment. they have benefitted so much, so sadly for us. our foreign policy is a complete disaster. no vision, no purpose. no direction. today, i want to identify five main weaknesses in our foreign policy. first, our resources are totally overextended. president obama has weakened our military by weakening our economy. crippled us with wasteful spending, massive debt, low growth, a huge trade deficit and open borders.
our manufacturing trade deficit with the world is now approaching $1 trillion a year. we're rebuilding other countries while weakening our own. ending the theft of american jobs will give us resources we need to rebuild our military, which has to happen, and regain our financial independence and strength. i am the only person running for the presidency who understands this and this is a serious problem. i am the only one, believe me, i know them all, i am the only one that knows how to fix it. secondly, our allies are not paying their fair share. and i've been talking about this recently a lot. our allies must contribute toward their financial, political, and human costs. have to do it, of our tremendous
security burden. but many of them are simply not doing so. they look at the united states as weak and forgiving and feel no obligation to honor their agreements with us. in nato, for instance, only four of 28 other member countries besides america are spending the minimum required 2% of gdp on defense. we have spent trillions of dollars over time on planes, missiles, ships, equipment, building up our military to provide a strong defense for europe and asia. the countries we are defending must pay for the cost of this defense. and if not, the u.s. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves. we have no choice. the whole world will be safer if our allies do their part to
support our common defense and security. a trump administration will lead a free world that is properly armed and funded and funded beautifully. third, our friends are beginning to think they can't depend on us. we've had a president who dislikes our friends and bows to our enemies. something that we've never seen before in the history of our country. he negotiated a disastrous deal with iran and then we watched them ignore its terms, even before the ink was dry. iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon, cannot be allowed. remember that, cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. and under a trump administration, will never, ever be allowed to have that nuclear weapon.
all of this, without even mentioning the humiliation of the united states with iran's treatment of our 10 captured sailors so zivividly, i remembe the day. in negotiation, you must be willing to walk. the iran deal, like so many of our worst agreements, is the result of not being willing to leave the table. when the other side knows you're not going to walk, it becomes absolutely impossible to win. you can't win. at the same time, your friends need to know that you will stick by the agreements that you have with them. you've made that agreement. you have to stand by it. and the world will be a better place. president obama gutted our missile defense program. then abandoned our missile defense plans with poland and the czech republic. he supported the oust of a friendly regime in egypt that
had a long standing peace treaty with israel and then helped bring the muslim brotherhood to power in its place. israel, our great friend, and the one true democracy in the middle east has been snubbed and criticized by an administration that lacks moral clarity, just a few days ago, vice president biden, again, criticized israel, a force for justice and peace, for acting as an impatient peace area in the region. president obama has not been a friend to israel. he's treated iran with tender love and care and made it a great power. iran has indeed become a great, great power in just a very short period of time because of what we've done. all of the expense and all at the expense of israel, our allies in the region, and very
importantly, the united states itself. we picked fights with our oldest friends and now they're starting to look elsewhere for help. remember that. not good. fourth, our rivals no longer respect us. in fact, they're just as confused as our allies. but an even bigger problem is that they don't take us seriously anymore. truth is, they don't respect us. when president obama landed in cuba on air force one, no leader was there, nobody, to greet him. perhaps an incident without precedent in the long and prestigious history of air force one. and then amazingly, the same thing happened in saudi arabia. it's called no respect. absolutely no respect.
do you remember when the president made a long and expensive trip to copenhagen denmark to get the olympics for our country, and after this unprecedented effort, it was announced that the united states came in fourth, fourth place. the president of the united states making this trip, unprecedented, comes in fourth place. he should have known the result before making such an embarrassing commitment. we were laughed at all over the world, as we have been many, many times. the list of humiliations go on and on and on. president obama watches helplessly as north korea increases its aggression and expands further and further with its nuclear reach. our president has allowed china to continue its economic assault on american jobs and wealth,
refusing trade deals and apply leverage on china necessary to reign in north korea. we have the leverage. we have the power. over china, economic power and people don't understand that. with that economic power, we can rei rein in and get them to do what they have to do with north korea which is totally out of control. he has even allowed china to steal government secrets with cyber attacks and engage in industrial espionage against the united states and its companies. we've let our rivals and away with anything. they do. if president obama's goal was to weaken america, he could not have done a better job. finally, america no longer has a
clear understanding of our foreign policy goals. since the end of the cold war, and the break-up of the soviet union, we've lacked a coherent foreign policy. one day, we're bombing libya and getting rid of a dictator to force their democracy for civilians. the next day, we're watching the same civilians suffer while that country falls and absolutely falls apart. lives lost. massive moneys lost. the world is a different place. we're a humanitarian nation. but the legacy of the obama/clinton interventions will be weakness, confusion, and disarr disarray. a mess. we've made the middle east more unstable and chaotic than ever before. we left christians subject to intense persecution and even genocide.
[ applause ] we have done nothing to help the christians. nothing. and we should always be ashamed for that. for that lack of action. our actions in iraq, libya, and syria have helped unleash isis. and we're at war against radical islam but president obama won't even name the enemy and unless you name the enemy, you will never, ever solve the problem. hillary clinton also refuses to say the words radical islam, even as she pushes for a massive increase in refugees coming into our country. after secretary clinton's failed intervention in libya, islamic terrorists in benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave
americans. then instead of taking charge that night, hillary clinton decided to go home and sleep. incredible. clinton blames it all on a video. an excuse that was a total lie. proven to be, absolutely a total lie. our ambassador was murdered, and our secretary of state misled the nation. and by the way, she was not awake to take that call at 3:00 in the morning. and now isis is making millions and millions of dollars a week selling libya oil and you know what? we don't blockade. we don't bomb. we don't do anything about it. it's almost as if our country doesn't even know what's happening, which could be a fact and could be true. this will all change when i become president. to our friends and allies, i say, america is going to be strong again.
america is going to be reliable again. it's going to be a great and reliable ally again. it's going to be a friend again. we're going to finally have a coherent foreign policy based upon american interests and the shared interests of our allies. we're getting out of the nation-building business and instead, focusing on creating stability in the world. our moments of greatest strength came when politics ended at the water's edge. we need a new rational american foreign policy. informed by the best minds and supported by both parties and it will be by both parties. democrats, republicans,
independents, everybody, as well as by our close allies. this is how we won the cold war and it's how we will win our new future struggles, which may be many, which may be complex, but we will win if i become president. [ applause ] first, we need a long-term plan to halt this spread and reach of radical islam. containing the spread of radical islam must be a major foreign policy goal of the united states of the united states and indeed, the world. events may require the use of military force, but it's also a philosophical struggle, like our long struggle in the cold war. in this, we're going to be working very closely with our allies in the muslim world. all of which are at risk for radical islamic violence,
attacks, and everything else. it is a dangerous world. more dangerous now than it has ever been. we should work -- >> [ applause ] >> thank you. we should work together with any nation in the region that is threatened by the rise of radical islam. but this has to be a two-way street. they must also be good to us. remember that. they have to be good to us. no longer one way. it's now two-way. and remember, us and all we're doing, they have to appreciate what we've done to them. we're going to help, but they have to appreciate what we've done for them. the struggle against radical islam also takes place in our homeland. there are scores of recent migrants inside our borders charged with terrorism. for every case known to the public, there are dozens and
dozens more. we must stop importing extremism through senseless immigration policies. we have no ideas where these people are coming from. there's no documentation. there's no paperwork. there's nothing. we have to be smart. we have to be vigilant. a pause for reassessment will help us to prevent the next san bernardino or, frankly, much worse. all you have to do is look at the wld trade center and september 11th. one of the great catastrophes, and my opinion, the single greatest military catastrophe in the history of our country, worse than pearl harbor, because you take a look at what's happened and citizens were attacked as opposed to the military being attacked. one of the true great catastrophes. and then there's isis. i have a simple message for
them. their days are numbered. i won't tell them where and i won't tell them how. we must -- [ applause ] we must, as a nation, be more unpredictable. we are totally predictable. we tell everything. we're sending troops, we tell them. we're sending something else, we have a news conferece. we have to be unpredictable. and we have to be unpredictable starting now. but they're going to be gone. isis will be gone if i am elected president and they'll be gone quickly. they will be gone very, very quickly. [ applause ] secondly, we have to rebuild our military, and our economy. the russians and chinese have rapidly expanded the military capability, but look at what's happened to us.
our nuclear weapons arsenal, our ultimate deterrent has been allowed to atrophy and is desperately in need of modernization and rewal and it has to happen immediately. our active duty armed forces have shrunk from 2 million in 1991 to about 1.3 million today. the navy has shrunk from 500. and the air force about one-third smaller than 1991. pilots flying b-52s in combat missions today. these planes are older than virtually everybody in this room. and what are we doing about this? president obama has proposed a 2017 budget in real dollars cuts
nearly 25% from what we were spending in 2011. our military is depleted, and we're asking our generals and military leaders to worry about global warming. we will spend what we need to rebuild our military. it is the cheapest single investment we can make. we will develop, build, and purchase the best equipment known to mankind. our military dominance must be unquestioned and i mean, unquestioned by anybody and everybody. but we will look for savings and spend our money wisely. in this time of mounting debt, right now, we have so much debt that nobody even knows how to address the problem. but i do. no one dollar can be wasted. not one single dollar can we
waste. we're also going to have to change our trade, immigration, and economic policies to make our economy strong again. and to put americans first again. this will ensure that our own workers, right here in america, get the jobs and higher pay that will grow our tax revenues, increase our economic might as a nation, make us strong financially again. so, so important. we need to think smart about areas where our technological superiority and no one comes close gives us an edge. this includes 3-d printing, artificial intelligence, and cyberwarfare. a great country also takes care of its warriors. our commitment to them is absolute and i mean absolute. a trump administration will give
our servicemen and women the best equipment and support in the world when and where they serve and the best care in the wod when they return as veterans and they come back home to civilian life. our veterans -- [ applause ] our veterans have not been treated fairly or justly. these are our great people. and we must treat them fairly. we must even treat them really, really well, and that will happen under the trump administration. finally, we must develop a foreign policy based on american interests. businesses do not succeed when they lose sight of their core interests and neither do countries. look at what happened in the 1990s. our embassies in kenya and tan
sei tanzania, a horrible period of time where we were attacked and 17 brave sailors killed on the uss call and what we do? it seemed we put more effort to adding china into the world trade organization, which has been a total disaster for the united states, frankly, we spent more time on that than we did in stopping al qaeda. we even had an opportunity to take out osama bin laden and we didn't do it. and then we got hit at the world trade center and the pentagon. again, the worst attack on our country in its history. our foreign policy goals must be based on america's core national security interests. and the following will be my priorities. in the middle east, our goal must be and i mean must be to defeat terrorists and promote
regional stability. not radical change. we need to be clear sighted about the groups that will never be anything other than enemies. and believe me, we have groups that no matter what you do, they will be the enemy. we have to be smart enough to recognize who those groups are, who those people are. and not help them. and we must only be generous to those that prove they are indeed our friends. [ applause ] we desire to live peacefully. and in friendship with russia and china, we have serious differences with these two nations, and must regard them with open eyes. but we are not bound to be adversaries. we should seek common ground based on shared interests. russia, for instance, has also seen the horror of