I have read part of this article. The part that states Shultz was dismayed with President Trump’s United States first policy - this has always mystified me. Why would an American citizen be dismayed or threatened by such a stance?
Schultz was in the club where you are forever meeting and chatting with foreign leaders. If you’re in the club and all the foreign leaders don’t like somebody, then you probably wouldn’t like him either.
To trust a politician is ultimately to be taken in. I don’t see how Schultz’s working for Nixon or Reagan means that he was more deceived than someone who worked for Johnson or Carter or Clinton or Obama or Biden or the Bushes was.
Because he was an internationalist.
> in Reykjavik in 1986 where, had Reagan been more flexible about Star Wars, they might have achieved far-reaching arms control agreements.
I think the article lost me at this point. It’s just regurgitating revisionism to eat away at actual history, not very thoughtful at all.
> in Reykjavik in 1986 where, had Reagan been more flexible about Star Wars, they might have achieved far-reaching arms control agreements.
I think the article lost me at this point. It’s just regurgitating revisionism to eat away at actual history, not very thoughtful at all.
Shultz died in 2022, at the age of 100. What do you really think that he knew about Donald Trump? Maybe he remembered Trump in the nineties, but I doubt that he knew any more than what the DC Republican elite told him about Donald as a Republican.