The article discusses the crucial role of credibility in U.S. foreign policy, particularly when presidents make threats regarding military or diplomatic action. It reflects on President Obama’s inaction after Syria crossed a 'red line' by using chemical weapons, which led to criticism of him for perceived bluffing. It also mentions former President Trump’s empty threats towards Hamas, highlighting the negative impact of failing to follow through on such high-stakes promises. The piece argues that credible threats are essential for national and international respect and authority.
The president of the United States is a powerful guy. He should not make empty threats. If the president says he's going to retaliate for some conduct, and the conduct occurs, then the president should retaliate in precisely the way he threatened.
Empty threats destroy credibility. If you say that you're going to move for sanctions if the other side doesn't withdraw its motion, and the other side doesn't withdraw its motion, then you must move for sanctions.
On March 5, Trump tweeted that Hamas must, "Release all of the hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you." Hamas ignored Trump; Trump did nothing.
Collection
[
|
...
]