Is the North Threat a 'THROW'? (Conspiracy Theory?)

Ok, thanks for the affirmation that President Trump responded to the H-Bomb detonation. I am inclined now to believe NK has a real H-Bomb.

Nonetheless, in this age, it is necessary to trace and check the veracity of news reports from any corporate news outlet.

Referring back to the discussion that McCain and his neocons (led by Petraeus) will attempt to take the war machine into hyperdrive on the Korean peninsula prolonging its operation to becoming a never-ending conflict in the manner that was done in Iraq and Afghanistan, note that President Trump apparently has another plan.

With reference to Petraeus’s suspected plan for a prolonged Korean conflict, President Trump has stated in the press that he will finish the conflict quickly referencing General Mattis’s statement that it would take 15 minutes to wipe out the NK regime. This, to me, is a clear message to McCain, Graham, and Petraeus that there will be no profiteering in the Korean conflict.

You seem to be a Hostage of every conspiracy out there.

I don't call that research - merely finding articles that fit some preconceived notions.

As to some particulars - the two main items:

First:

1. 1. Trump, McMaster and the Petraeus legacy (Asia Times) http://www.atimes.com/article/trump-mcmaster-petraeus-legacy A primer on the reality of David Petraeus’s legacy.

But the present ruin of Iraq and Syria is the direct result of the surge, which bought a temporary peace in Mesopotamia at the price of arming a Sunni resistance that eventually backed ISIS.

That was written by: David Paul Goldman (born September 27, 1951) is an American economist,[1] music critic, and author, best known for his series of online essays in the Asia Times under the pseudonym Spengler.

What makes "Spengler" and expert on the topic, by education, background or experience? Zero, zip, nada. Just a guy no better than any other guy, with an opinion.

And what he wrote uses a flimsy premise that does not hold up to the empirical evidence. He writes as if "Petreaus" set out with a plan to destabilize Iraq and beyond and sold it to G.W.Bush as the surge. That's not only nutty, it is not what happened. The surge did work. Iraq WAS on the road to a stable security situation. Regular formal "Al Queda" units and what became known as ISIS were hurting, ineffective and getting no where.

What happened then, Petreaus? No. What happened was Obama and Maliki. Obama wanted his deal with the Mullahs in Tehran, and with that goal in mind did not irritate them with a SOFA agreement with Maliki, for a minor but strong continued security role for the U.S. in Iraq. So, no SOFA agreement, and no significant U.S. security role in Iraq? Part of Petreaus and GWBush's idea? No. Obama's.

Then Maliki began governing as a Shiite more than an Iraq, decimated the top professional ranks of the Iraqi military with cronies and stooges, turned his state security apparatus into a tool for witch hunts, arrests and incarceration of political opponents, as well as rewarding Shiite politicians and THEIR constituents, and dissing Sunnis.

Maliki and Obama together changed the stable situation there were left into the stew that ISIS set out to take advantage of.

That was not Petreaus doing. So "Spengler's" whole premise that "the surge" created ISIS and disorder in Iraq does not pass the smell test.

Next: 2. Petraeus planning massive war in Syria http://rickwells.us/report-mcmaster-petraeus-planning-unilateral-war-syria-150000-us-troops

I have no doubt that under Obama and with Trump the question has been asked - how can WE take out Assad militarily. It would be dumb if neither Obama nor Trump ever asked that question. Due diligence would require it, no matter what either Obama or Trump's preconceived ideas on it were. It would also be expected that in answer to such a question, American military officers with rank and experience in the Middle East would be asked, and would say, privately and publicly in different forums, what such an effort would take.

Translating all that into those who have expressed an opinion on it as "selling", or "marketing" that answer - as if "pushing it", is the stuff of conspiracy theories, not learned study.

What is presented in that matter is no more than one guy says it, and a bunch of other places pick it up and repeat & regurgitate it, and that mere repetition - in some sources I wouldn't give the time of day to - is supposed to make the argument "stronger"? No way.

Petraeus also instructed McMaster to remove Bannon from the NSC.

"Instructed"??? McMaster?? No PROOF whatsoever.

You call the item below "research"??

In May 2017 Petraeus continues to ‘market’ war and floats the prospect of war with China. (Video 2.5 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COnkA3muUrU

All that is presented is two guys giving their personal take on what Petreaus said, and not a word of what Petreaus said. What you really get from it is not a Petreaus world view of things as much as their own - the U.S. is a warmonger. Petreaus is an American general. What did they think an American general was going to talk about, economics??? "marketing" war No proof.

The rest you gave is just the endless repetition of things disparaging about Petreaus. It surely paints him in a negative light, some which could be true.

HOWEVER none of it represents any proof that Trump is the puppet and Petraeus and McMaster the puppet masters PUSHING "their" wars on Trump.

Look I would be the last one found among any cheerleaders for McMaster, but that is mainly derived from nothing you presented, and nothing concerning Petreaus. It comes from his work with an international think tank that was pushing for the deal Obama made with the Mullahs of Tehran. We don't have his private input to them on that issue, but we do have the result of their work lobbying for the deal.

But your "proofs" of Petreaus-McMaster conspiracy begin with premises:

"the surge failed and caused the calamity in Iraq which helped ISIS" - wrong - Obama and Maliki threw away all the gains that followed the surge

Petreaus "selling" massive U.S. ground war in Syria and he and McMaster are "pushing it" on Trump. NO PROOF. They are generals; they've been asked for opinions; they've given them; and so have others; and so have other ideas been offered. I don't see Trump taking on Russia in Syria. Better letting them stew in that mess themselves, while we help the Kurds against ISIS, which is what Trump has been doing.

Would I rather not see McMaster at the NSC? Yes.

Selling conspiracy theories won't get us there.

Waddaya think about this thread article Fred? A bit too heavy on the vast deep state conspiracy?

bkmk