Posted on 04/10/2017 8:19:33 AM PDT by George Rand
Perhaps it is my skepticism, but the "usual suspects," I.e. Lindsey Graham Cracker, John McLame, Clinton News Network, Nancy Botox Pelosi, Cuck Schumer, etc. Now supporting Trump after the air-strike.
Makes me mighty suspicious.
“What if Putin put him up to it as a test for the new president to see what he would do.”
Definitely a possibility. If so Trump fired a high inside fast ball right back at him.
Good point.
Oh no! Concern troll noob is concerned!!
You can add the Chi-Coms as well. The lefts pogrom against the Judeo-Christians is in high gear.
This is one data point in a complex situation, the more important question is long-term strategy in Syria, and if there was really anybody better than Assad to support, then name that entity and explain why it should be supported, otherwise, I think we’re stuck with Assad and the Russians as the least of all evils. Had our globalist masters realized this five or ten years ago, then none of this would have happened, and Syria would still be a functioning nation state rather the source of an endless stream of refugees.
So against that backdrop, I don’t see much point in the raid on Assad’s air base personally, but if it is simply meant to demonstrate limits and dampen down the Trump-is-a-dupe-of-Moscow war chants, then fine, play that card.
I do think that Trump’s most loyal supporters need to realize that there are early warning signs involved in this action that will lead to more serious political trouble for Trump down the road, if this is actually just the first of many globalist type actions he intends to take. At some point Trump himself becomes anti-Trump if you see what I mean, the actual concept of “Trump” is fairly well established and it includes not getting into costly Middle East quagmires. A Trump who does that is no more use than a Clinton or a McCain.
I suspect this subject has already come up at the White House and at least some in the inner circle realize that the Trump support base don’t want to please McCain, Graham and Clinton. I’m hoping this is just a one-off aberration and that the talks in Moscow will lead to a more realistic policy going forward. If not Assad, then who? There is no obvious answer to that question.
Do you have a mind of your own?
Why would the support by those individuals cause you concern, when in fact, President Trump’s action in Syria has brought forth a mother load of negative attention to the cowardly Obama?
Wormwood = The Screwtape Letters.
Wormtongue = The Lord of the Rings.
“if there was really anybody better than Assad to support, then name that entity and explain why it should be supported”
Well maybe the Syrian people know someone they would prefer to Assad. I read somewhere this morning that the agreement between Assad, Obama and Putin was that Assad was to step down once ISIS was taken care of.
LOL when should you NOT be suspicious of them?
IF that turns out to be what happens, it’s unprecedented. The fake gas attack would have been designed to put him in a trap. The fake response gets him off the hook with the libs, doesn’t rub P-Putin’s nose in it too much, gets him his nuke in the Senate, and provides a nice fireworks show for P-XI to enjoy over his Creme Brulee. I like it.
I think the nuke vote was before the attack. The confirmation on Friday already happened after the nuke vote the day before.
They forgot that he ran on a platform of beating the crap out of our enemies. How was he supposed to accomplish this, by casting flowers and wearing a pussyhat?
What about by hitting at the real enemies, instead of ISIS’ enemies?
I don’t see much point in the raid on Assad’s air base personally, but if it is simply meant to demonstrate limits and dampen down the Trump-is-a-dupe-of-Moscow war chants, then fine, play that card.
Bill Clinton’s aspirin attack.
It may come as a surprise to Trump’s enemies, but he’s perfectly capable of multitasking (walking & chewing gum ;)
>
I think some people misconstrued Trump to be some kind of Quaker pacifist. They forgot that he ran on a platform of beating the crap out of our enemies. How was he supposed to accomplish this, by casting flowers and wearing a pussyhat?
>
IIRC, he also ran saying Syria was a ‘bad call’.
Lastly, I fail to note when/how/why Syria is ‘our enemy’ to beat the crap out of....what’s our ‘vital national interest’ (IMO, the last refuge and used as often as ‘regulate commerce’ to do anything anywhere) in the area?
Do you really think the Russian and the Syrian militaries are targeting ISIS? I’ve got the San Francisco-Oakland bay bridge to sell you ;-)
Presidents sometimes say things on the campaign trail, then change their minds when in the oval because they become privy to Intel they hadn’t avail themselves to as candidates.
This
And on core issues, no one can convince me that Trump hasn’t kept his campaign promises – executive orders overturning a plethora of regulations, withdrawing from the TPP, rebuilding the military. Each of these decisions takes balls.
Which is a large reason why I opposed this attack. We should do everything to piss off and frustrate the plans of Hillary-Obama-McCain.
So what exactly has Trump done to eliminate ISIS within Syria?
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.