Posted on 04/09/2017 12:20:44 PM PDT by markomalley
DONALD Trump’s dramatic U-turn on taking military action in Syria was sparked by the heartbreak of his daughter Ivanka, it has been claimed.
The US President, who had previously been opposed to the US launching airstrikes on Syria, announced that the gas attack could not be tolerated and ordered the 59-missile bombing of an airbase involved in the fatal chemical assault.
(Excerpt) Read more at thesun.co.uk ...
Trump, as he holds a crying Ivanka in his arms: “Don’t you worry, my favorite little daughter. Daddy will take care of that mean old Assad for you.”
Just stop
This has been posted a ridiculous number of times
It has no names and is insane
I'll second that motion.
As tragic as the plight of Christians in the Middle East obviously is, there is clearly a significant worldwide aversion to the use of chemical or biological weapons by Tyrants. There are international agreements which must be enforced, and that leadership role automatically falls to the United States.
If people want to have protecting Christians worldwide become an aspect of US foreign policy, then they should make that case to the Congress and President. I, myself, sympathize with such a goal.
There's no doubt that Christians are being exterminated in many places in the Middle East, almost in the way that the Nazis exterminated Jews.
This should be a cause that the entire world embraces—but doing so would certainly involve a lot more "intervention".
Obama scolded Assad for using chemical weapons. President Trump punished Assad for using chemical weapons. I have a hard time believing that nothing should have been done.
There were clearly US interests involved, if nothing more than the fact that we have our own assets in Syria which are vulnerable to chemical attacks, and also the fact that such attacks tend to exacerbate refugee problems.
I don't know whether these proposed "safe zones" are something which can be practically established or not, but they sound like a decent idea.
I don't think there's a compelling case to be made for putting a lot of US boots on the ground in Syria, however...
Yeah, because they can't put it on the internet if it isn't true, and the media never lies or fabricates stories.
The CIA is not Trump’s friend. They will lie like hell to him.
specifically, pax americana is a response to the perceived failure of strict USA neutrality a la switzerland. it surfaced briefly during ww i in 1917 after the zimmerman telegram from germany to mexico promising mexico some of USA land if mexico supported germany and germany successfully attacked and defeated the USA.
after ww i, so called isolationists in the USA argued for a return to swiss style neutrality by the USA.
this state of affairs was overturned by the japanese attack on pearl harbor in 1941, which was regarded as another failure of swiss style neutrality. the driving concept of modern (post ww ii) pax americana, as i informally understand it, is that the usa cannot afford to be neutral (in the style of switzerland) because evil countries continue to do evil things and eventually those evil actions by evil countries will infringe upon the security of the USA.
with this policy and driving concept, isolationism as a political force receded into the background after ww ii.
isolationism as a political force resurfaced during the vietnam war, specifically beginning with senator mccarthy campaigning for president in the 1968 presidential campaign. however, it seemed IIRC to be limited mainly to US policies in southeast asia.
beginning with the freeing of the iranian embassy hostages by reagan in 1981, pax americana again became the dominant USA foreign policy.
(i wonder if this very brief summary is accurate.)
Apparently, they couldn't help themselves when they passed the gossip papers at the check-out counter.
“Trust me, Wilbur. People are very gullible. They'll believe anything they see in print.”
― E.B. White, Charlotte's Web
Her opinions are aired and have weight because of her position in the administration. Aside from being Trump's daughter and son in law, how exactly are Ivanka and Jared's qualified for their jobs? As far as I can tell, she's a dress saleswoman and he inherited the family real estate portfolio after his old man got thrown in the can for tax evasion.
Nothing....
At this rate Ill be staying home in 2020. My support level is down to about what I had for W after TARP.
A lot of threads getting yanked these past couple of days.
Mods are busy.
Point taken though I am still mystified by this action.
Buy Raytheon stock!!
thank you, yes that is my point. Either trump naively took the bait and/or subscribes to the same globalist agenda, or he has a gun to his head
in the 2016 presidential election, trump campaigned in part on a foreign policy of modern day isolationism and rejection to some degree of pax americana.
however, it has seemed to be difficult in practice for trump supporters to pin trump down on some campaign specifics, particularly on issues that did not seem central to his campaign. issues that seemed most central to trump’s campaign included building a wall on the mexican border, limiting immigration from some muslim countries, reducing taxes, supporting the military, and repealing obamacare.
imho trump is certain to be aware of recent USA history, including the recurring theme of pax americana.
therefore the notion of ivanka trump suddenly influencing trump in the direction of pax americana seems somewhat oversimplified and naiive to me. more likely there was an active debate pro and con intervention by trump’s advisors, and the pro intervention trump advisors won trump over to their side with arguments based on or similar to pax americana.
having made the decision, trump would have been faced with coming up with a story that would maximize public support and minimize alienating his true believer (isolationist) supporters. ivanka claiming influence would be a convenient avenue towards maximizing such political support for the intervention by trump.
by using ivanka in a political way, trump continues in the mold of Andrew Jackson, specifically his first lady, who was Emily Donelson.
Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Hopefully Ivanka will move beyond her need to share her every thought with the world; rarely are they helpful
She posted them on Twitter, and a tabloid picked them up. And what position and power does she actually have in the White House? Do you work there so you know absolutely, and can provide a job description of what her duties are, and how much she influences all those advisors the President hand-picked? Are you privy to all that?
Frankly, I don't care what they're qualifications are for whatever it is they do. President Trump asked them to be there with him, and for me, that's okay. I'm not about to tell him who he can, and can't have with him in the White House. You obviously don't trust that the President can make his own decisions.
Yeah, as far as you call tell "she's a dress saleswoman and he inherited the family...blah, blah, blah..." are nothing but assumptions, and they suck. They're no better than what the press reports: assumptions, rumors, and innuendos. Sounds like you lap everything up that the press has to offer.
Glad you posted that caveat. Lately, it’s been hard to tell around here.
“I hope this isn’t true. While I have favorable impressions of Ivanka, I didn’t vote for her. I voted for Donald.”
You voted for Mr Trump while he was being advised in the primaries & the general election by none other than Ivanka & Jared.
I figure if they did a good enough job in advising him to a general election victory they are good enough to continue advising him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.