I think even this is too kind. The small gain would have to be pegged to a very specific time horizon. This will not provide any benefit.
-
-
-
My point is even with the most generous assumptions possible, it's still a bad idea.
-
I'm just trying to work out the possible outcomes and I don't see the upsides. I just see American influence crumbling. We are close to the same thought process here, I'm just less optimistic believe it or not.
-
I'm pretty pessimistic about all this too. That being said, I think it's valuable to evaluate decisions under generous assumptions. If the result is still pretty bad, then the decisions probably not a good idea.
-
I agree with your method that's why I was stipulating to your in good faith decision making assumption. I was almost hoping that you or someone could get me thinking there could be a positive. Got anything or is this handbasket headed where I thought?
-
I have nothing to positive to say about deliberately straining the western alliance.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I can’t see the upside of destroying the greatest alliance in the world. (Got that one from
@MalcolmNance) -
Good line. Unfortunate reality.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Trump never acts strategically.
-
Assume for the sake of argument.
-
My imagination is limited these days. Sorry.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Even small gain assumes that 6 other countries can't figure out game
@POTUS is playing. He isn't a master poker player and only ones who can't figure that out are some members of press. When your cards are on table the game is over. Letting the bully win is bad precedent.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.