Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Hank Scorpio

Really Interested wrote: »

BTW since the unit started I have seen the cars no more than 6 times.

I know you've gone to the bother of listing off specific attacks, and agree for the most part over the period of time you've cited. I agree with your sentiment on the possibility of an attack.
I'm of the opinion things have changed in the past 2-3 years, not necessarily here, but Europe as a whole.

Really Interested

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I know you've gone to the bother of listing off specific attacks, and agree for the most part over the period of time you've cited, but I'm of the opinion things have changed in the past 2-3 years, not necessarily here, but Europe as a whole. That debate is for another thread though.

Yes things have changed since 2001 as befor that terror in Europe was left wing or republican now most terror attacks are Islamic terror, my point is the west was not going to be destroyed by Catholic terror have to go back to guy fawkes for that neither is Islamic terror the barbarians at the gate.

While Ian Hisslop may not be every ones cuppa I would advise watching this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08w2cvq

https://youtu.be/RTEFkdmKWFk[URL][/url]

Hank Scorpio

Really Interested wrote: »

Yes things have changed since 2001 as befor that terror in Europe was left wing or republican now most terror attacks are Islamic terror, my point is the west was not going to be destroyed by Catholic terror have to go back to guy fawkes for that neither is Islamic terror the barbarians at the gate.

I edited my post, I agree with you entirely wanted to make that clear. First time for everything

Really Interested

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I edited my post, I agree with you entirely wanted to make that clear. First time for everything

That's what annoys me about Trump and his like and there is guys on the other side just as bad who decide us and blame "the other" for things we can only fix if we deal with real not made up problems.

I would strongly advice that people watch "who should we let in" it's an hour long but excellent history show.

demfad

Really Interested wrote: »

Yes things have changed since 2001 as befor that terror in Europe was left wing or republican now most terror attacks are Islamic terror, my point is the west was not going to be destroyed by Catholic terror have to go back to guy fawkes for that neither is Islamic terror the barbarians at the gate.

While Ian Hisslop may not be every ones cuppa I would advise watching this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08w2cvq[URL][/url]

Right wing terror groups are the largest and most threatening in the US. They are there or thereabouts in Europe too.
Pre 2001 most terror attacks were anti imperial, or nationalist. That would cover both left and right. Any insurgencies/'terrorism' in the former Soviet Union were not left wing.

Really Interested

demfad wrote: »

Right wing terror groups are the largest and most threatening in the US. They are there or thereabouts in Europe too.
Pre 2001 most terror attacks were anti imperial, or nationalist. That would cover both left and right. Any insurgencies/'terrorism' in the former Soviet Union were not left wing.

I would agree about USA but I was specifically talking about Europe.

Hank Scorpio

demfad wrote: »

Right wing terror groups are the largest and most threatening in the US. They are there or thereabouts in Europe too.
Pre 2001 most terror attacks were anti imperial, or nationalist. That would cover both left and right. Any insurgencies/'terrorism' in the former Soviet Union were not left wing.

You are off your rocker pal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism_in_Europe_(2014%E2%80%93present)

Really Interested

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

You are off your rocker pal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism_in_Europe_(2014%E2%80%93present)

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/05/muslims-only-carried-out-2-5-percent-of-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil-between-1970-and-2012.html

"Non-Muslims Carried Out More than 90% of All Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil"

While that is up to 2005 it includes 9/11.

So you quote a wiki article covering 2 and a half years?

Do you remoember Germany in the 70's and 80's do you remember these islands spain etc

Hank Scorpio

Don is tweeting like he's a kid sending his parents a message from camp

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/883229270943911936

Really Interested

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Don is tweeting like he's a kid sending his parents a message from camp

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/883229270943911936

He is more dangerous to western civilisation than anything outside.

Leroy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Don is tweeting like he's a kid sending his parents a message from camp

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/883229270943911936

Its very strange. I mean are we really supposed to believe that the leader of Japan, faced with the increasing threat of NK is really talking about the DNC server?

That Merkel, faced with Brexit and the ongoing arguments over Nato and the continuing refugee crisis, is worried about the DNC server.

That May is worried about anything other than simply getting through another week!

Hank Scorpio

The thought of that is funny alright.

phater phagan

He's lying ( again ) of course. Podesta did nothing of the sort, according to respectable US news organisations - NPR etc.

phater phagan

phater phagan wrote: »

He's lying ( again ) of course. Podesta did nothing of the sort, according to respectable US news organisations - NPR etc.

The same NPR that took to Twitter to call for an overthrow of the US government 3 days ago???? :pac:

InTheTrees

Deleted User wrote: »

The same NPR that took to Twitter to call for an overthrow of the US government 3 days ago???? :pac:

That had to be one of the funniest expose's of the low information trump supporters.

Save

Billy86

Deleted User wrote: »

The same NPR that took to Twitter to call for an overthrow of the US government 3 days ago???? :pac:

You... are joking, right?





Otherwise, here's an interesting example of someone trying to plant actual 'fake news' to discredit the media with recently. I know who my guess about where it came from in some shape or form is.

Celticfire

Billt86 wrote:

In other news, tourism to the US is plummeting as predicted....

International travel continued to defy the expectations of many in May 2017, according to the U.S. Travel Association’s latest Travel Trends Index (TTI), posting its 13th straight month of year-over-year growth.

International travel to the U.S. grew 5.2 percent in May versus the same month in 2016.

It seems your predictions and analysis were completely wrong.

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

It seems your predictions and analysis were completely wrong.

A dollar down by 9c on the Euro not helped by a certainly will definitely help them here.

You yourself don't seem to have chimed in on Trump's agreement that Russia did interfere with the elections last year while we're at it. I take it you agree they did then?

Celticfire

Billy86 wrote: »

A dollar down by 9c on the Euro not helped by a certainly will definitely help them here.

You yourself don't seem to have chimed in on Trump's agreement that Russia did interfere with the elections last year while we're at it. I take it you agree they did then?

I see your posting style of putting words into other peoples mouth is still going strong.

Why can't you admit that you were completely off the mark regarding the tourism industry failing because of Trump?

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

I see your posting style of putting words into other peoples mouth is still going strong.

Why can't you admit that you were completely off the mark regarding the tourism industry failing because of Trump?

Like I said, I didn't expect the dollar to drop this much this quick.

Don't see where I put words in your mouth there. I'll ask it very straight forward and see if you will give a straight forward answer - do you agree with Trump that Russia interfered in the election, or do you disagree with him and think that Russia did not interfere?

Celticfire

Billy86 wrote: »

Like I said, I didn't expect the dollar to drop this much this quick.

13 months straight growth in numbers.....
The dollar only fell in the last 2-3 months according to yourself so unless people booked international flights and holidays to the US at the very last minute (which is unlikely) your accrediting this rise in tourism to a fall in the Dollar is misguided at best. You and all the others that predicted the fall were wrong.

Don't see where I put words in your mouth there.

I didn't "chime in" on it so how could you assume anything?

I'll ask it very straight forward and see if you will give a straight forward answer - do you agree with Trump that Russia interfered in the election, or do you disagree with him and think that Russia did not interfere?

I have no opinion one way or the other on that subject. If I had I'd have given it.

Leroy42

Celticfire wrote: »

13 months straight growth in numbers.....
The dollar only fell in the last 2-3 months according to yourself so unless people booked international flights and holidays to the US at the very last minute (which is unlikely) your accrediting this rise in tourism to a fall in the Dollar is misguided at best. You and all the others that predicted the fall were wrong.

It could very well be like the effects of brexit. The economists predicted a fall off straight away, when in fact it is only now (if that is what appears to be happening with inflation, service & industrial numbers) that it is coming to pass.

As you said, international travel would probably have been booked at least a number of month in advance so, just like the jobs numbers, it is hard to gauge what effect Trump is actually having.

My own view would be that travel numbers will take a hit to some extent, but the US is such a massive tourist destination that so many factors come into play, and Trump is only a small part of that. The price of the US$ etc would play a bigger part.

Also, it would be useful to see what the pricing structure of flights etc are. Are places like Disneyland giving better prices and as such many people may take the change to save some money on the usual despite reservations of the Trump effect.

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

I didn't "chime in" on it so how could you assume anything?

Which is exactly why I said you didn't chime in. And then I asked a question of you, and did not put words in your mouth. You appear a little eager to play the victim card here and we have been through this routine before.

I have no opinion one way or the other on that subject. If I had I'd have given it.

So just to be sure - and that way we can avoid claims of anyone putting words in your mouth, and this is a straight question to you - you are not of the belief that Russia did or did not interfere with the election whatsoever in either direction?

If that is the case, it's interesting as you have made several skeptical posts about the matter previously.


Missed your ninja edit but Leroy already responded to it.

aloyisious

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Don is tweeting like he's a kid sending his parents a message from camp

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/883229270943911936

Ta Hank Totally fake news from Don to mislead then, ignoring the inconvenient fact that the CIA is not permitted legally to collect intelligence concerning the domestic activities of US citizens? His standard is high.

JRant

It's blindingly obvious Russia tried to interfere with the US election, they do it to most western countries. The extent of this interference is wildly overestimated IMO. It would have consisted of mostly propaganda and online campaigns.

I believe it was Comey (open to correction) that stated it had no material impact on the election results.

Billy86

JRant wrote: »

It's blindingly obvious Russia tried to interfere with the US election, they do it to most western countries. The extent of this interference is wildly overestimated IMO. It would have consisted of mostly propaganda and online campaigns.

I believe it was Comey (open to correction) that stated it had no material impact on the election results.

Mind you whether he is right or wrong there Comey himself had quite the impact most likely.

Celticfire

Billy86 wrote: »

So just to be sure - and that way we can avoid claims of anyone putting words in your mouth, and this is a straight question to you - you are not of the belief that Russia did or did not interfere with the election whatsoever in either direction?

I'm sure they did attempt in some way or another as did Obama in the French Presidential elections. I've no idea what level of interference was achieved.

If that is the case, it's interesting as you have made several skeptical posts about the matter previously.

I'm entitled to be skeptical of things that I feel demand a more that one sided view.

Missed your ninja edit but Leroy already responded to it.

Do you admit to being completely wrong then? You were adamant that the tourism industry was failing and it was all down to Trump.

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

I'm sure they did attempt in some way or another as did Obama in the French Presidential elections. I've no idea what level of interference was achieved.

I'm entitled to be skeptical of things that I feel demand a more that one sided view.

We're not talking about endorsing a candidate, because Putin as best I know never endorsed anyone in the US election. They're two very different things.

Do you admit to being completely wrong then? You were adamant that the tourism industry was failing and it was all down to Trump.

It's higher than I saw coming, but then again I didn't expect the dollar to plummet that quickly which certainly has played a big role in itself.

listermint

JRant wrote: »

It's blindingly obvious Russia tried to interfere with the US election, they do it to most western countries. The extent of this interference is wildly overestimated IMO. It would have consisted of mostly propaganda and online campaigns.

I believe it was Comey (open to correction) that stated it had no material impact on the election results.

And direct contact with the representatives of one Donald Trump on multiple occasions. Over stated... no dressed down by certain quarters. Yes

Celticfire

Billy86 wrote: »

We're not talking about endorsing a candidate, because Putin as best I know never endorsed anyone in the US election. They're two very different things.

It's still interfering. He was trying to influence the outcome of an election.

It's higher than I saw coming, but then again I didn't expect the dollar to plummet that quickly which certainly has played a big role in itself.

How convenient that the value of the dollar can now be used by you as an excuse. When variables such as the exchange rate were used in arguments against your claim, you dismissed that the value of the dollar had anything to do with tourism plummeting. You laid it firmly on Trump.

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

It's still interfering. He was trying to influence the outcome of an election.

It's an open endorsement, very different to secretly trying to influence proceedings while having various meetings with one candidates team that they then go on to try and keep secret. Not comparable.

How convenient that the value of the dollar can now be used by you as an excuse. When variables such as the exchange rate were used in arguments against your claim, you dismissed that the value of the dollar had anything to do with tourism plummeting. You laid it firmly on Trump.

When the currency of a country goes down, it becomes more affordable to visit. I would appreciate you quoting the part in bold, not saying I didn't say that because I'm assuming you have looked it up prior but would appreciate the quote.

Celticfire

Billy86 wrote: »

It's an open endorsement, very different to secretly trying to influence proceedings while having various meetings with one candidates team that they then go on to try and keep secret. Not comparable.


When the currency of a country goes down, it becomes more affordable to visit. I would appreciate you quoting the part in bold, not saying I didn't say that because I'm assuming you have looked it up prior but would appreciate the quote.

Actually I do apologize. You did say that the summer would be telling after another poster mentioned the exchange rate. I was going from memory and got that wrong. I hold my hand up there.

JRant

Billy86 wrote: »

Mind you whether he is right or wrong there Comey himself had quite the impact most likely.

Has an FBI Director, outside of Hoover, had as much influence in pre and post election campaign?

JRant

listermint wrote: »

And direct contact with the representatives of one Donald Trump on multiple occasions. Over stated... no dressed down by certain quarters. Yes

I'm in two minds on this to be honest. In one camp it's being made out to be a "reds under the bed" scenario and in the other camp it's seen as a "nothing burger".

I don't really see an issue with the administrations representatives meeting with Russian counterparts, it's the manner in which some of this meetings occurred that raises legitimate questions.

mcmoustache

JRant wrote: »

I don't really see an issue with the administrations representatives meeting with Russian counterparts, it's the manner in which some of this meetings occurred that raises legitimate questions.

It probably wouldn't have been as big a deal if they didn't all have amnesia over it.

InTheTrees

JRant wrote: »

I don't really see an issue with the administrations representatives meeting with Russian counterparts, it's the manner in which some of this meetings occurred that raises legitimate questions.

The problem isn't so much the administration meeting with Russians it's the potentially treasonous behaviour of some of the trump campaign before the election.

Billy86

JRant wrote: »

Has an FBI Director, outside of Hoover, had as much influence in pre and post election campaign?

I wouldn't know enough in detail but it would be hard to say one has - Trump won the EC by a comfortable margin but when you look at the number of states he won by a sliver (not least Florida which was a 58 point swing) and the massive change in polling in the 10-ish days between Comey disclosing info on just the one investigation and not the other (think it went from about 80/20 in favour of Clinton to 60/40 within a week), it's clear just how much he influenced proceedings. Nobody will ever be able to say for definite, but Trump won Florida by 1.2%, Wisconsin by 0.78%, Pennsylvania by 0.72% and Michigan by 0.23% - between them that is a swing of 150 seats which would have seen the results end up almost identical in the opposite direction.

I am hugely against him getting fired, but it is the bed he made for himself also. For all the talk of them being 'out to get him' (Trump) for certain corners it should be noted that FBI HQ was reportedly nicknamed 'Trumpland' during the campaign trail.

One thing is for sure, the biopic on his last 12 months is going to be pretty interesting (my guess is a summer/autumn 2020 release).

JRant

Billy86 wrote: »

I wouldn't know enough in detail but it would be hard to say one has - Trump won the EC by a comfortable margin but when you look at the number of states he won by a sliver (not least Florida which was a 58 point swing) and the massive change in polling in the 10-ish days between Comey disclosing info on just the one investigation and not the other (think it went from about 80/20 in favour of Clinton to 60/40 within a week), it's clear just how much he influenced proceedings. Nobody will ever be able to say for definite, but Trump won Florida by 1.2%, Wisconsin by 0.78%, Pennsylvania by 0.72% and Michigan by 0.23% - between them that is a swing of 150 seats which would have seen the results end up almost identical in the opposite direction.

I am hugely against him getting fired, but it is the bed he made for himself also. For all the talk of them being 'out to get him' (Trump) for certain corners it should be noted that FBI HQ was reportedly nicknamed 'Trumpland' during the campaign trail.

One thing is for sure, the biopic on his last 12 months is going to be pretty interesting (my guess is a summer/autumn 2020 release).

It's probably fair to assume he had a larger impact than any perceived Russian influence IMO.

As you say we may never know but it will be fascinating to look back on when the dust settles.

I think firing him was the correct decision, the timing was atrocious though and led to this omnishambles.

phater phagan

I do believe that the biggest threat to America is Donald Trump. By using the same divide and conquer tactics that worked so well down history with various despots - Caesar, Napoleon, Mussolini, Franco and Hitler - he wants to be the new emperor.

Gbear

phater phagan wrote: »

I do believe that the biggest threat to America is Donald Trump. By using the same divide and conquer tactics that worked so well down history with various despots - Caesar, Napoleon, Mussolini, Franco and Hitler - he wants to be the new emperor.

I really don't think he has a clarity of thought or level of vision required for such an attempt.

I think the problem is he doesn't understand what a president is, how it works or what its role is supposed to be.

As a result, he doesn't know what his limitations are and when he bumps up against them he goes on the attack, heedless of the consequences - hence the ham-fisted effort at his Muslim ban and subsequent attacks on one of the cornerstones of the US - the independant judiciary.

For this reason I also don't believe it would have been possible for him to knowingly collude with the Russians.
It's possible they smoothed the way without his knowledge or members of his cabinet or advisors were manipulating him to that end but I can't see him being capable of orchestrating it, even to the standard where most of his inner circle have obvious links to Russia.

That doesn't mean he's not dangerous, and he's following a lot of the same autocratic actions of people like you've mentioned, but it's accidental in this case.

JRant

Gbear wrote: »

I really don't think he has a clarity of thought or level of vision required for such an attempt.

I think the problem is he doesn't understand what a president is, how it works or what its role is supposed to be.

As a result, he doesn't know what his limitations are and when he bumps up against them he goes on the attack, heedless of the consequences - hence the ham-fisted effort at his Muslim ban and subsequent attacks on one of the cornerstones of the US - the independant judiciary.

For this reason I also don't believe it would have been possible for him to knowingly collude with the Russians.
It's possible they smoothed the way without his knowledge or members of his cabinet or advisors were manipulating him to that end but I can't see him being capable of orchestrating it, even to the standard where most of his inner circle have obvious links to Russia.

That doesn't mean he's not dangerous, and he's following a lot of the same autocratic actions of people like you've mentioned, but it's accidental in this case.

Agree fully with you. He seems to be of the autocratic management style and thinks he can transfer that across to the presidency.

I don't believe he colluded with the Russians as (a) he just doesn't have the political nous to carry it out and (b) he wouldn't be able to not tell people even if he had.

I also don't think he's the danger that people are making out either. The US system may have its flaws but it is proving very robust in countering some of his more outlandish ideals. Congress are investigating any the Russian thing, along with the FBI, and the courts have already put the breaks on the muslim ban and made him reign it in a bit.

He seems to be getting the blame for the split in American discourse but if truth be told this has been coming long before he took office. The right have been moving further from the centre and parts of the left seem to have gone "full retard".

Hank Scorpio

What are the direct implications of this proposed ceasefire in Syria?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/ap-sources-us-russia-reach-deal-syria-ceasefire-48502569

"The United States and Russia struck an agreement Friday on a cease-fire in southwest Syria, crowning President Donald Trump's first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is the first U.S.-Russian effort under Trump's presidency to stem Syria's six-year civil war.

The cease-fire goes into effect Sunday at noon Damascus time, according to U.S. officials and the Jordanian government, which is also involved in the deal."

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

What are the direct implications of this proposed ceasefire in Syria?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/ap-sources-us-russia-reach-deal-syria-ceasefire-48502569

"The United States and Russia struck an agreement Friday on a cease-fire in southwest Syria, crowning President Donald Trump's first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is the first U.S.-Russian effort under Trump's presidency to stem Syria's six-year civil war.

The cease-fire goes into effect Sunday at noon Damascus time, according to U.S. officials and the Jordanian government, which is also involved in the deal."

Not sure. Internet is having issues so could not read the link. Normally ceasefires are to let civilians to leave a region or to attempt peace talks again. Unsure which is the case here.

A ceasefire without a reason is just moving the deaths a few days back.

Essentially I need more information and to see if it is used well. I am hopeful though as both sides have plenty of people experienced in this matter and both sides seem happy with it so definitely seems like good news.

Billy86

Trump looks like he's wussing out on climate change discussions so he can cosy up with Putin at the same time - very odd timing for their meeting indeed! :pac:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-first-meeting-g20-summit-climate-change-discussions-same-time-global-a7828541.html

Hank Scorpio

Billy86 wrote: »

Trump looks like he's wussing out on climate change discussions so he can cosy up with Putin at the same time - very odd timing for their meeting indeed! :pac:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-first-meeting-g20-summit-climate-change-discussions-same-time-global-a7828541.html

That's one interpretation :P

Hank Scorpio

O'Keefe nailed the Washington Post here in fairness.

Hank Scorpio

Billy86 wrote: »

Just to mention, the USD has now dropped for 96c against the Euro to 87c in the last 2-3 months.

Also the country fell short of expected job creating in June, at 158,000 vs an expected 185,000 - http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/06/adp-private-sector-jobs-june-2017.html

That report is a bit misleading no?

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/07/us-nonfarm-payrolls-june-2017.html

"The U.S. job market roared back to life in June, with a better-than-expected 222,000 new positions created in June while the unemployment rate held at 4.4 percent, according to a government report Friday.

Economists surveyed by Reuters had been expecting nonfarm payrolls growth of 179,000 and the unemployment rate to be 4.3 percent."

Malayalam

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

What are the direct implications of this proposed ceasefire in Syria?



"The United States and Russia struck an agreement Friday on a cease-fire in southwest Syria, crowning President Donald Trump's first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is the first U.S.-Russian effort under Trump's presidency to stem Syria's six-year civil war.

The cease-fire goes into effect Sunday at noon Damascus time, according to U.S. officials and the Jordanian government, which is also involved in the deal."

Whatever one thinks of Donald Trump - and my opinion is that, in spite of the constant spin, he has thus far done no worse than Obama did, nor than Clinton would have done - the possibility of the US and Russia coming to some agreement on how to co-operate to clear up the catastrophic mess in Syria can only be good. Trump is probably all the uncouth, crazy, bumbling, egotistical, narcissistic (etc) things that people say he is, but I have never got the feel off him that he is an out and out warmonger. That for me - and given the impossible choice - is the one reason I preferred him to win the presidency.

Christy42

Malayalam wrote: »

Whatever one thinks of Donald Trump - and my opinion is that, in spite of the constant spin, he has thus far done no worse than Obama did, nor than Clinton would have done - the possibility of the US and Russia coming to some agreement on how to co-operate to clear up the catastrophic mess in Syria can only be good. Trump is probably all the uncouth, crazy, bumbling, egotistical, narcissistic (etc) things that people say he is, but I have never got the feel off him that he is an out and out warmonger. That for me - and given the impossible choice - is the one reason I preferred him to win the presidency.

Well they have decided on a ceasefire which is a good thing but they have not agreed with Russia on how to clear up the mess in Syria. There have been ceasefires before and I don't expect this one to either. This is not a slight on Trump given the difficult situation over there but let's not give credit for something he has not done yet. Hopefully it sorts out Syria but I doubt it.

As for not a warmonger I never got this opinion. He has blown Obama out of the water in terms of drone strikes which was something Obama was rightly in my opinion slated for. He has also reduced the oversight the president has on a lot of missions and actively decided to start selling weapons to Saudi Arabia again.

Do you have any reasons you don't feel he is a warmonger as you don't seem to give them?

Malayalam

Christy42 wrote: »

Well they have decided on a ceasefire which is a good thing but they have not agreed with Russia on how to clear up the mess in Syria. There have been ceasefires before and I don't expect this one to either. This is not a slight on Trump given the difficult situation over there but let's not give credit for something he has not done yet. Hopefully it sorts out Syria but I doubt it.

As for not a warmonger I never got this opinion. He has blown Obama out of the water in terms of drone strikes which was something Obama was rightly in my opinion slated for. He has also reduced the oversight the president has on a lot of missions and actively decided to start selling weapons to Saudi Arabia again.

Do you have any reasons you don't feel he is a warmonger as you don't seem to give them?

My reasons are largely subjective and therefore easy to dismiss. He has indeed as you say continued the previous regimes warring activities though I imagine this is for the most part the actions of the permanent government or deep state or whatever people want to call it. But when I observe Trump he reminds me of a totally inappropriate embarrassing relation who says all the politically incorrect things but who at heart does not want cataclysm. I didn't feel that way about Clinton, she is irrevocably cold, calculated etc... Again all subjective feelings. On a slightly more rational level if I was to write the script of Trumps life, there would be a lot not to like but war hungry imperialist would seem to be a plot twist too far. His previous life gives no indication of such inclination, he may adopt it going forward but it wouldn't be a native trait. Speaking as an imaginary script writer, I mean. Clinton however would not strain the imagination too much if she played the role of warmonger. These are purely subjective observations... The feel of the character that I get when I observe them. Sorry that's the best I can do