Here’s what I know—what we are doing now isn’t working. And years ago, when I was just starting out in business, I figured out a pretty simple approach that has always worked well for me:
When you’re digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole, stop digging.
My approach to foreign policy is built on a strong foundation: Operate from strength. That means we have to maintain the strongest military in the world, by far. We have to demonstrate a willingness to use our economic strength to reward those countries that work with us and punish those countries that don’t. That means going after the banks and financial institutions that launder money for our enemies, then move it around to facilitate terrorism. And we have to create alliances with our allies that reveal mutual benefits.
If we’re going to continue to be the policemen of the world, we ought to be paid for it.
Teddy Roosevelt always believed we should “speak softly and carry a big stick.” I’ve never been afraid to speak up to protect my interests and, truthfully, I don’t understand why we don’t speak more loudly about the ways we are losing around the world. If we don’t speak up, how is anything ever going to get better? How are we ever going to win?
America is the most powerful country in the world and we shouldn’t be afraid to say it. “Iron Mike” Tyson, the famous fighter, once explained his philosophy, saying, “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”
The first thing we need to do is build up our ability to throw that punch. We need to spend whatever it takes to completely fund our military properly. Fifteen years ago I wrote, “We can’t pursue forward military and foreign-policy objectives on a backward military budget.”
The best way not to have to use your military power is to make sure that power is visible.
When people know that we will use force if necessary and that we really mean it, we’ll be treated differently.
With respect.
Right now, no one believes us because we’ve been so weak with our approach to military policy in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Building up our military is cheap when you consider the alternative. We’re buying peace and we’re locking in our national security. Right now we are in bad shape militarily. We’re decreasing the size of our forces and we’re not giving them the best equipment. Recruiting the best people has fallen off, and we can’t get the people we have trained to the level they need to be. There are a lot of questions about the state of our nuclear weapons. When I read reports of what is going on, I’m shocked.
It’s no wonder nobody respects us. It’s no surprise that we never win.
Spending money on our military is also smart business. Who do people think build our airplanes and ships, and all the equipment that our troops should have? American workers, that’s who. So building up our military also makes economic sense because it allows us to put real money into the system and put thousands of people back to work.
There is another way to pay to modernize our military forces. If other countries are depending on us to protect them, shouldn’t they be willing to make sure we have the capability to do it? Shouldn’t they be willing to pay for the servicemen and servicewomen and the equipment we’re providing?
Depending on the price of oil, Saudi Arabia earns somewhere between half a billion and a billion dollars every day. They wouldn’t exist, let alone have that wealth, without our protection. We get nothing from them. Nothing.
We defend Germany. We defend Japan. We defend South Korea. These are powerful and wealthy countries. We get nothing from them.
It’s time to change all that. It’s time to win again.
We’ve got 28,500 wonderful American soldiers on South Korea’s border with North Korea. They’re in harm’s way every single day. They’re the only thing that is protecting South Korea. And what do we get from South Korea for it? They sell us products—at a nice profit. They compete with us.
We spent two trillion dollars doing whatever we did in Iraq. I still don’t know why we did it, but we did. Iraq is sitting on an ocean of oil. Is it out of line to suggest that they should contribute to their own future? And after the blood and the money we spent trying to bring some semblance of stability to the Iraqi people, maybe they should be willing to make sure we can rebuild the army that fought for them.
When Kuwait was attacked by Saddam Hussein, all the wealthy Kuwaitis ran to Paris. They didn’t just rent suites—they took up whole buildings, entire hotels. They lived like kings while their country was occupied.
Who did they turn to for help? Who else? Uncle Sucker. That’s us.
We spent billions of dollars sending our army to win back Kuwait. Our people were killed and wounded, but the Iraqis went back to their country.
About two months after the war, several Kuwaitis came up to my office to discuss a deal I wanted to do with them. Believe me, they would not have lost money on this deal. They told me, “No, no, no, we do not like the United States for investment purposes. We have great respect for you, but we want to invest outside of the United States.”
We had just handed them back their country!
They were watching TV in the best hotel rooms in Paris while our kids were fighting for them. And they didn’t want to invest in this country?
How stupid are we?!
Why didn’t the United States make a deal with them that outlined how they would pay for us to get their country back for them? They would have paid anything if just asked.
The point is, we’re spending trillions of dollars to safeguard other countries. We’re paying for the privilege of fighting their battles. It makes no sense to me.
It really is time the rest of the world paid their fair share, and if I have anything to say about it, they will!
The biggest question people ask about foreign policy is at what point do we put boots on the ground? We can’t be afraid to use our military, but sending our sons and daughters should be the very last resort. I’ve seen what wars do to our kids. I’ve seen their broken bodies, know all about the horrors that live in their heads, and the enormous effects of trauma. We cannot commit American troops to battle without a real and tangible objective.
My rules of engagement have always been pretty simple—if we are going to intervene in a conflict, there had better be a direct threat to our national interests. The threat should be so obvious that most Americans will know where the hot spot is on the globe and will quickly understand why we are getting involved. Also, we’d better have an airtight plan to win and get out.
In other words, my strategy would be the exact opposite of our strategy in going to war with Iraq.
Iraq was no threat to us. The American people had no idea why the Bush administration decided to attack.
Our brilliant strategists had to twist our intelligence reports and drum up reasons for an invasion. We targeted Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction as a justification. There was no plan (or a very flawed one) to win and leave. Before the war started I came out very strongly against it. It made no sense to me. I said then that it would be a disaster and would destabilize the Middle East. I said that without Iraq to hold them back, Iran would attempt to take over the Middle East.
And that’s exactly what has happened.
There are some places in the world where massive force is necessary. The threat from ISIS is real. It is a new kind of enemy and it has to be stopped. The longer we wait before doing that, the more dangerous it will become. We don’t need another 9/11 to understand that these people want to kill us, and we’re not doing enough to prevent them from spreading their vicious brand of terrorism. The headlines and videos tell us what we’re dealing with: rapes, kidnapping, and lining up civilians in order to cut their heads off. There is also strong evidence that ISIS is resorting to chemical warfare.