“I think one dramatic thing [Trump] does, 3, 6, 9 months from now, he pulls us out of NATO. He says, 'I'm the guy who did it,' and tells America First people, 'see, NATO is the example of what we hate.'”
This quote offers a bold and specific prediction of a radical shift in U.S. foreign policy and its underlying political motivations, sparking strong reactions.
Bill Kristol
“I think one dramatic thing he does, 3, 6, 9 months from now, he pulls us out of NATO... This will be historians I fear will see this as a key moment in the disintegration of the US led world order.”
This quote makes a bold and specific prediction with profound geopolitical implications, linking a potential political action to the collapse of the global order.
Bill Kristol
“The Singaporean foreign minister... is quoted this morning saying, it's over. It's over. This system is gone.”
This quote delivers a stark and alarming perspective on the potential collapse of the post-World War II global order, attributed to a foreign dignitary, making it highly provocative and shareable.
Bill Kristol
“Every outcome is bad for us. No one will think we look very competent, and we certainly don't look competent in planning the war. We have an erratic president who went to war without doing any of the most obvious preparations... Our allies all over the world have lost confidence in us.”
It delivers a scathing critique of U.S. foreign policy competence and leadership, with significant implications for global alliances.
Bill Kristol
“Finishing the job would mean destroying the state structure of Iran, turning it into a failed state for quite a while.”
This provocative statement offers a stark and controversial interpretation of a potential military objective, challenging listeners to consider the extreme implications of such actions.
Bill Kristol
“They lost 40 of their top officials on the first day. Israel continues to bump off very senior people. And they're still functioning pretty well, pretty effectively it looks like. They were more prepared for this than one thought.”
Challenges assumptions about the effectiveness of attrition strategies against an adversary by highlighting the unexpected resilience and preparedness of the Iranian regime.
Bill Kristol
“From their point of view, having nukes would have meant Israel could not attack them twice within nine months. Nukes were a deterrent or a possible offensive weapon against Israel and against the Gulf States.”
It presents a counter-argument to the idea of strategic weapons reducing the importance of nuclear programs, highlighting the perceived necessity of nukes for security against specific threats.
Bill Kristol