An obvious application was his claim that US forces going into the Middle East should have "taken the oil." What does it mean to "take the oil." Well, when anyone other than Donald Trump sends forces into the Middle East, it presumably means seizing control of all oil production in the country and using it to US benefit, with no regard to anyone else. And, by that standard, none of Trump's rivals ever "took the oil" because such a thing is just about impossible. But when Trump is in power, he can just send a few troops to guard a few oil wells and claim that he "took the oil." How can you possibly disprove that? You might point to other oil facilities outside of his control, but how many Americans will actually go to the Middle East and see for themselves.
Only slightly less extreme was his claim that he would build a wall and make Mexico pay for it. There was no need to actually do such a thing, just put in a few miles of wall and announce that it is built. How many people are going to traverse the entire 2000 miles of border to fact check that? Granted, there are people who live by the border who can point out that no wall has gone up where they live. But just say that most of the wall has gone up and that their area is one of the last to receive it. Again, how many people who notice that the wall has not gone up in their area are going to traverse the entire 2000 miles to see how much of it has been built. And as for making Mexico pay for it -- look if Donald Trump says Mexico has paid for the wall, how can you possibly disprove him?
So I do agree with the people who say that the best response to Trump's latest nutty pronouncements is to say, "Sure, dude. I'll believe you when you show me, no sooner."
No comments:
Post a Comment