what you want to know is the united states will stand with you if russia starts to do something. that strategic ambiguity that president trump has been fostering over the last few months leaves people like that feeling uncertain. on nato nato has certainly been cleared up. turning a corner. you talked about syria, cokie, our policy is we re going to strike out against atrocities committed by assad there are atrocities every day. cokie, you know that chemical weapons crosses a red line, the international community has said for years is a red line. there are wars across the globe. but again, the international norms. 2 million syrian children who are refugees right now. what are we doing about them? nothing. there are all kinds of atrocities going on. what we seem to be seeing and
towards president xi. and he said they had good chemistry. he really liked him, his wife, and china was a villan for the president during the campaign. that was unexpected. another on china was the car insurance any manipulation. twofold, one is that he was doing that because china was no longer a currency manipular. but he added that even if china was manipulating currency, now is not a time for the u.s. to be able because he needs things from china on north korea. as he is showing flexibility there on his policies just based on what he may need. the other things he may fleed a foreign leader and a willingness to charge because he said the situation changed and china is no long aerocurrency manipulator. also he said that he changed his
some of those are policies that are evolving toward the president s position. it looks like stability. yeah, except that is not necessarily, it doesn t play out entirely because if you look at currency manipulation, for instance, china had stopped devaluing their currency for some time. the president started doing that when he go elected but it started before that. on nato the president said they shifted their focus toward terrorism. and that wasn t in response to the president, and two he said that you know they re finally paying their fair share, but that is also not their process. they were put in the process before president trump was elected to have allies pay their 2% of their gdp towards defense.
him come face-to-face with the realities of governance. he s changed his mind on several issues within the past few days, david, on nato, for example, relations with russia, china s currency manipulation, the export/import bank of america, intervention in the middle east. it s flipped on a lot of these issues within the last few days alone. is that encouraging to you? well, i think it s interesting to me. i want him to make responsible decisions. i m not one who wants him to make bad decisions so democrats can seize a political advantage. i don t think that s good in the long run for anyone. what we ve seen is you had a candidate who had not so much a set of positions but a set of applause lines and they were very pungent. it s a great applause line to kick china, it s a great applause line to kick mexico. there s a lot of political currency in attacking nato, but when you get into that job and
house whiplash. on nato, saying it was obsolete, then and now. nato is obsolete, it s over 67 years old, it is, many countries doesn t cover terrorism, it covers the soviet union, which is no longer in existence. and nato has to be either rejiggered, rechanged for the better. the secretary general and i had a productive discussion about what more nato can do in the fight against terrorism. i complained about that a long time ago and they made a change, and now they do fight terrorism. i said it was obsolete, it s no longer obsolete. for the record, nato did respond to terrorism. and have fought and died on terrorism. china was a currency manipulator and he was going to call them out. tough talk. he got a lot of applause during