Top ranking Republican Senator Bob Corker (R-TN), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, expressed concerns Sunday that President Trump’s reckless threats toward other counties “could set the nation on the path to World War III.”
Trump spent the better part of the weekend on Twitter angrily condemning Corker, accusing him of being behind the P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran, and saying he’s not running for another term in office because “he doesn’t have the guts.”
Corker said that top administration officials are constantly trying to protect Trump from his own interests, and much of the work of today’s White House is “a situation of trying to contain him.”
Corker went on to say Trump’s irresponsible outbursts should be concerning to all Americans, and that he’s treating the presidency like it’s a reality television show. He also said Trump’s Twitter outbursts have in several instances harmed diplomatic efforts of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
While Trump has yet to respond to Corker’s latest comments, the last thing he’d said earlier in the day was that he expects Corker to “be a negative voice and stand in the way of our great agenda.”
Sen. Corker’s comments are an unprecedentedly public rebuke of Trump from his own party, but are seen as reflective of some other Republican leaders who are uncomfortable with Trump’s volatile behavior. It may also be a bigger problem than Trump expects if he’s totally alienated Corker, as the Republican majority in the Senate is small, and losing a top leader’s public loyalty could easily cost him some close votes.
If it gets rid of Porker, then he can talk all the smack he wants…
Why are the editors of antiwar.com soft on Trump?
Because Trump voters sre the only trully antiwar people left in this country. Liberals, intellectuals of all stripes have been marginalized into writing clubs with no influence.
You are wrong.
Just like that! No reflection, no arguments needed.
As far as I know it is only pro-Trump sites that are condistently against empire building. And consistently vlear about the harm empires do. Inly today, it was done in the name of globalism.
Perhaps if you were to validate what you stated (Trump voters sre the only trully antiwar people left in this country) with facts we might have something to “argue” about. But blanket statements that are indefensible are not worth the effort. So, you are wrong, no reflection needed.
Antiwar.com is consistently against empire building.
Antiwar.com is not a pro-Trump site.
QED, it is not only pro-Trump sites that are consistently against empire building.
I love when uneducated, under/unemployed, ignorant, irrational, delusional know nothings (like you) comment. It’s comedy gold. You’re a ridiculous sock puppet.
Technically speaking, you are correct. But technicality is s bit overstretched. Antiwar at times serves empire builders, as they saintly declare sny “regime” to be villanous, as soon as it shows propensity of not bowing to the lords of the Universe. And occassionally even antiwar bought into the message of demonizing — practically appologizing for being antiwar.
But on more then one occassion the site has globalist outlook. One cannot be a globalist — support open borders, shadowy transnational rulers, lack of democratic accountability — and still claim to be anti-empire. Globalism is an intellectual support for empire. It advocates what empire builders crave the most — freedom from restraints of state institutions, freedom from the accountability. It matters not what you cll youself
One cannot be nationalist or pro-state and be anti-empire. Those two things aren’t anti-globalist, they’re proto-globalist.
All regimes are villainous. The state is a cancerous tumor wherever it appears.
Geez, did I vote for Trump and not remember? In a nutshell what you said is flat out bulls**t.
They’re not.
You never know what these guys are really talking about. Corker does not really mind neocon crazy — he just minds the kind of crazy that goes far beyond neocon crazy. Then the naked agreedion is exposed, and cannot be hidden in neocon vocabulary of human rights, concern for madmen, and dictatkrs killing their own people. So, now the neocons are forced to condemn Trump for SAYING what they would like to be DOING. The real trick is — how to get us, the voters go along meekly with the ever expanding global aggression. Trump is ruining it by saying exactly what they want to do.
If this keeps up — may be even zombified Democrats will want to put brakes on the military. Can you imagine, neocons becoming antiwar? Worried about WWIII?
Corker, a liberal interventionist/neocon warmonger is the one who wants confrontation with Russia.
“….and losing a top leader’s public loyalty could easily cost him some close votes…”
We can only hope we can only hope
unfortunately as we all know, American presidents who are ‘in trouble’ domestically, often use or arrange for some foreign relations/overseas episode or macho showdown or war as a form of distraction from the political and social problems at home.
But in this case, as China has well warned, if the US strikes first, it will defend north Korea and that may mean an escalation into nukes… and china has a lot of them, as well as an enormous army
To me all war is a distraction from the real problems of peace, which in this current world is a world on fire, literally burning up, & which is going to hell quickly in a hand-basket because of global warming and all the ecological devastation to come; to which the entire republican party, alas, is paying absolutely no attention (and the democrats weren’t much better either considering the severity of the problem), in fact they are all stoking the fires by their apathy and indifference.