Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

[goDel]

the world is twin peaks. 

 

at first I was like

 

then i was like

[joshuatxuk]

RE: Trump non-interventionist 

 

Echoing what was said earlier the biggest difference between Obama and Trump regarding Syria, to Obama's credit, was the UN-backed removal of chemical weapons earlier. Cynics will say it was pointless after the 2017 and recent attack but the fact is:

1. a large amount was destroyed and delayed Assad from using them for years

2. it didn't involve risky and expensive missile and airstrikes 

 

 

Trump has had a lot of paleoconservative / post-neocon right-winger hopes pinned on him not getting involved overseas. It might backfire a bit (it made Alex Jones cry, lol) Even though it's been part of Tea Party and right-wing ideology to shift toward non-interventionist actions it's never overtaken the GOP's establishment's hawks or Dem mods who generally green-light military strikes like this. On top of that, right-wingers for the most part hold a weird non-interventionist rooted more in a "fuck em' " and American First mentality and not a moral opposition against war. It makes complete sense that Trump would be for recklessly spending more on the military while also talking about pulling out from overseas interventions. He praises the military but ignores their leadership. He wants to tout military might without any moral or ideological guideline. I wouldn't even call it realpolitik because it's so illogical and contradictory. It's the same position as despotic military dictatorships, ironically, Syria, Iran, DPRK, and Myanmar...spend endlessly on the military while everything else goes to shambles, including the military itself, and burn diplomatic bridges in the process. 

 

I can only imagine pentagon generals spending hours talking Trump out of insane orders and requests all of the time. I bet any money what the DoD did in the last few days was specific and pragramatic compared to what Trump had in mind. I also would bet he's going to completely be indifferent to Syria next week and onward.

Edited April 15, 2018 by joshuatx

[YangYing]

could someone pls link me to proof of Assad performing chemical attacks this and last year pls thank you

[goDel]

could someone pls link me to proof of Assad performing chemical attacks this and last year pls thank you

 

you should google "syrian airlines" and take a visit to inspect the situation yourself.

 

in all honesty though, the way russia dismissed the entire story makes me believe it's probably true. when they're going on the offense about something being *fake*, it's likely they're (part) to blame. (eg. skripal, mh17)

[Kavinsky]

could someone pls link me to proof of Assad performing chemical attacks this and last year pls thank you

ehm the weapons are manufactured in assads military factories as well as fired by their army so ehm yes ?

[joshuatxuk]

 

could someone pls link me to proof of Assad performing chemical attacks this and last year pls thank you

 

you should google "syrian airlines" and take a visit to inspect the situation yourself.

 

in all honesty though, the way russia dismissed the entire story makes me believe it's probably true. when they're going on the offense about something being *fake*, it's likely they're (part) to blame. (eg. skripal, mh17)

 

 

 

 

could someone pls link me to proof of Assad performing chemical attacks this and last year pls thank you

ehm the weapons are manufactured in assads military factories as well as fired by their army so ehm yes ?

 

 

there's really no valid reason to suspect the chemical weapon usage is a hoax for many reasons:

1. it's a moot point militarily - keep in mind Russia deploys Thermobaric_weapons, the US used cluster bombs in the Balkans and Iraq while virtually every other major NATO force has eliminated them, and Israel and US most likely used White_phosphorus_munitions since 2003 in combat. these are all weapons deemed in various ways and to varying degrees as cruel and unusual. bear in mind flamethrowers and napalm were eventually discarded not because of their horrible nature but because of tactical ineffectiveness compared to guided munitions/smart bombs

2. regimes like Syria scramble to use any form of weaponry as pariah states - they were using barrel bombs and rusted cold war stock bombs flown on barely operable jets before Russian re-supplies. anti-government forces have been absurdly inventive as well - everything from drones dropping anti-personal munitions to slingshot grenades to homemade long range sniper rifles. chemical weapons used in one strike in one battle to gain a strategic victory after 8 years of perpetual war on multiple fronts is worth it for assad.

3. chemical weapons are a 'line in the sand' because it breaks international law and it is being highlighted now for that reason, otherwise the carnage goes on

Edited April 15, 2018 by joshuatx

[YangYing]

aye, cheers for the info guys.. the situation is such a bloody mess can't tell who is lying or who is ignorant or who is dumb

[chenGOD]

 

What adults around him? He has surrounded himself with toadying yesmen.

Mattis. Arguably Kelly as well.

 

Doubts about Bolton. He looks to me more like the barking dog type. Lots of barking. Less stupid actions. But Mattis and Kelly though. And essentially the entire top at Defense.

 

Again, influence the news cycle? Hire some Mexicans doing crazy stuff. Or have some fake news about Chinese tariffs.

Mattis maybe.

Bolton is a neo-chicken hawk. His preferred option on North Korea is pre-emptive strikes. He has always been one for advocating sending young Americans to their deaths, or military actions that will result in death and destruction overseas.

 

I obviously didn’t mean it in a conspiratorial fashion, I simply meant the Drumpsterfire cabal is being opportunistic. When you look at his tweeting around the event it just looks like he thought “oh here’s an opportunity to talk about something that’s not my potential criminal charges”.

It still blows me away that his team lets him use Twitter, and that he openly discusses policy on it.

 

Also mad props to Josh on this recent topic: super informative posts.

I also think the commentary on here in general is really a good example of civilized debate on a topic. Yes there’s not any alt-right in here, but dissenting points seem to be reasonably discussed. Well done WATMM!

[YangYing]

no sjw bs either, watmm for president imo

[goDel]

curious what fluorescentgrey has to say about this on the tweeterfeed. I'm sure he thinks we all need to be brought before the hague court for our opinions. needs more greenwald, so to speak ;-p

[goDel]

and josh is ON POINT

 

as always

[whosebrian]

What Is Aleppo?

[goDel]

What Is Aleppo?

[whosebrian]

 

What Is Aleppo?

 

[YangYing]

[Amen Warrior]

Assad was apparently an ophthalmologist at the western eye hospital in london before his older brother died and he became heir. I find that kind of stuff completely mental. There will be british peeps out there who got their eyes fixed by him in the 80s.

[ambermonk]

Yeah I heard he was previously an eye doctor before he became Syria's leader.

Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but my understanding is that, if we go back to the origins of the Arab Spring in 2011, the catalyst was the revolution in Tunisia, literally ignited by the fruit vendor Mohamed Bouazizi, who responded to harassment from officials by protest via self-immolation, in December 2010.

I dunno. Interesting how certain individuals throughout history can single-handedly cause major global conflicts. Not unlike Gavrilo Princip with the First World War.

[chenGOD]

Two articles on the Syrian missile strikes:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-airstrikes-damascus-reaction-1.4620866

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-airstrike-russia-trump-chemical-weapons-strategy-1.4620381

[ignatius]

Two articles on the Syrian missile strikes:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-airstrikes-damascus-reaction-1.4620866

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-airstrike-russia-trump-chemical-weapons-strategy-1.4620381

 

 

[usagi]

Yeah I heard he was previously an eye doctor before he became Syria's leader.

 

Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but my understanding is that, if we go back to the origins of the Arab Spring in 2011, the catalyst was the revolution in Tunisia, literally ignited by the fruit vendor Mohamed Bouazizi, who responded to harassment from officials by protest via self-immolation, in December 2010.

 

I dunno. Interesting how certain individuals throughout history can single-handedly cause major global conflicts. Not unlike Gavrilo Princip with the First World War.

 

respectfully, they're not alike at all. one guy attempted an assassination for misguided nationalist gain and set off a powder keg that was being stockpiled for decades prior. the other guy was part of a mass uprising demanding a better life which found itself subverted/co-opted by other malicious parties and driven into sectarian/civil conflict.

 

they don't have similar motivations at all. in fact, the only thing that's in common in both cases is that the cause of the conflict is often reduced to these individuals whereas it was driven by something way bigger and with a lot more moving parts.

Edited April 16, 2018 by usagi

[zaphod]

yeah and that princip analogy is terrible as well. 

[YangYing]

 

could someone pls link me to proof of Assad performing chemical attacks this and last year pls thank you

 

 

what? I'm big noob in this and also lazy.. the contrary position to the mainstream narrative seems to be entirely based on lack of proof for the attacks etc. I'm just wanna get the whole pic which posts on last page where p useful for, so cheers

[ambermonk]

 

Yeah I heard he was previously an eye doctor before he became Syria's leader.

 

Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but my understanding is that, if we go back to the origins of the Arab Spring in 2011, the catalyst was the revolution in Tunisia, literally ignited by the fruit vendor Mohamed Bouazizi, who responded to harassment from officials by protest via self-immolation, in December 2010.

 

I dunno. Interesting how certain individuals throughout history can single-handedly cause major global conflicts. Not unlike Gavrilo Princip with the First World War.

 

respectfully, they're not alike at all. one guy attempted an assassination for misguided nationalist gain and set off a powder keg that was being stockpiled for decades prior. the other guy was part of a mass uprising demanding a better life which found itself subverted/co-opted by other malicious parties and driven into sectarian/civil conflict.

 

they don't have similar motivations at all. in fact, the only thing that's in common in both cases is that the cause of the conflict is often reduced to these individuals whereas it was driven by something way bigger and with a lot more moving parts.

 

Well yeah, that's the point I was getting at. If it seemed like I was trying to draw a similarity between the two conflicts themselves, that wasn't my intention. Merely their catalysts.

Edited April 16, 2018 by ambermonk

[joshuatxuk]

^ Interesting point either way, the fact that the world is still grappling with the wake of Arab Spring. I feel like it's a bit unprecedented in terms of how condensed and wildly spread it was. The array of post-WW2 colonial wars and post-cold war conflicts come to mind but nothing quite like 2010. I can see where Ambermonk was getting at in terms of this wide scope of a movement emerging so abruptly, even if it was off the mark to compare it to WWI.

 

 

Also mad props to Josh on this recent topic: super informative posts.
I also think the commentary on here in general is really a good example of civilized debate on a topic. Yes there’s not any alt-right in here, but dissenting points seem to be reasonably discussed. Well done WATMM!

 

 

 

and josh is ON POINT

 

as always

 

Thanks but I'm only really confident when it comes to random niche stuff, I feel like I get more perspective and info from these threads more than I put into them. Often I feel like I'm just talkin' out of my ass a lot but in a way that keeps me sane.

 

[whosebrian]

Sean Hannity is Michael Cohen’s third mystery client

 

 

A gasp was heard in the courtroom when a Cohen lawyer disclosed the name of the third client: Sean Hannity.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-16/trump-worlds-collide-as-cohen-meets-stormy-daniels-in-n-y-court