DC Tom Posted April 15, 2017 Posted April 15, 2017 Can't do that. Then people will start to figure out we're working with our sworn enemies who butchered 3000 Americans, burn babies, drown people in acid, and behead people for sport. No, actually they'll figure out that we don't know who we're working with. You consistently attribute far too much coherence to both the Syrian Civil War and to our policy regarding it.
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2017 Author Posted April 15, 2017 (edited) No, actually they'll figure out that we don't know who we're working with. You consistently attribute far too much coherence to both the Syrian Civil War and to our policy regarding it. The wikileaks drops make it quite clear 44's administration was quite clear who they were working with, as was HRC. And the men and women serving over there have made it quite clear to me that the folks on the ground are well aware too. You're not holding them to the fire enough imo. Edited April 15, 2017 by Deranged Rhino
grinreaper Posted April 15, 2017 Posted April 15, 2017 The wikileaks drops make it quite clear 44's administration was quite clear who they were working with, as was HRC. And the men and women serving over there have made it quite clear to me that the folks on the ground are well aware too. You're not holding them to the fire enough imo. Why do you think Christopher Stevens was even in Benghazi and the Obama administration tried to hide everything about it?
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2017 Author Posted April 15, 2017 Why do you think Christopher Stevens was even in Benghazi and the Obama administration tried to hide everything about it? Yup. Running guns to AQ affiliates in Syria. We've been actively funding, arming, training, and working with AQ for years now. The picture they wish to paint is that they're only working with vetted rebels (which is a lie) or that the battlefield is chaotic and there's no way to tell who we're working with (also a lie). The reality is that it is a snake pit but the sides are very well drawn.
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2017 Author Posted April 15, 2017 *********************** Why Is Trump Fighting ISIS in Syria? But when pressed, there is one idea everyone on the team seems to agree on: “The defeat of ISIS,” as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson put it. Well, let me add to their confusion by asking just one question: Why? (SNIP) The other incarnation is “territorial ISIS.” It still controls pockets in western Iraq and larger sectors of Syria. Its goal is to defeat Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria — plus its Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah allies — and to defeat the pro-Iranian Shiite regime in Iraq, replacing both with a caliphate. (SNIP) So what else could we do? We could dramatically increase our military aid to anti-Assad rebels, giving them sufficient anti-tank and antiaircraft missiles to threaten Russian, Iranian, Hezbollah and Syrian helicopters and fighter jets and make them bleed, maybe enough to want to open negotiations. Fine with me. (SNIP) Trump should want to defeat ISIS in Iraq. But in Syria? Not for free, not now. In Syria, Trump should let ISIS be Assad’s, Iran’s, Hezbollah’s and Russia’s headache — the same way we encouraged the mujahedeen fighters to bleed Russia in Afghanistan. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/12/opinion/why-is-trump-fighting-isis-in-syria.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fthomas-l-friedman&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection&_r=0
Tiberius Posted April 15, 2017 Posted April 15, 2017 *********************** Why Is Trump Fighting ISIS in Syria? But when pressed, there is one idea everyone on the team seems to agree on: “The defeat of ISIS,” as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson put it. Well, let me add to their confusion by asking just one question: Why? (SNIP) The other incarnation is “territorial ISIS.” It still controls pockets in western Iraq and larger sectors of Syria. Its goal is to defeat Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria — plus its Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah allies — and to defeat the pro-Iranian Shiite regime in Iraq, replacing both with a caliphate. (SNIP) So what else could we do? We could dramatically increase our military aid to anti-Assad rebels, giving them sufficient anti-tank and antiaircraft missiles to threaten Russian, Iranian, Hezbollah and Syrian helicopters and fighter jets and make them bleed, maybe enough to want to open negotiations. Fine with me. (SNIP) Trump should want to defeat ISIS in Iraq. But in Syria? Not for free, not now. In Syria, Trump should let ISIS be Assad’s, Iran’s, Hezbollah’s and Russia’s headache — the same way we encouraged the mujahedeen fighters to bleed Russia in Afghanistan. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/12/opinion/why-is-trump-fighting-isis-in-syria.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fthomas-l-friedman&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection&_r=0 What does Thomas Friedman have to do with all this?
Deranged Rhino Posted April 16, 2017 Author Posted April 16, 2017 What does Thomas Friedman have to do with all this? It's the content of the article. He's advocating openly arming ISIS in Syria by giving them anti-aircraft weapons...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 16, 2017 Author Posted April 16, 2017 (edited) Syria war: 'At least 68 children among 126 killed' in bus bombing "But there is also no evidence that rebels were involved in the attack, as the government claims. It would not be in the rebels' interest, our correspondent says, as they were waiting for their own supporters to be evacuated from the other towns." http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39613313 Gotta spin the story somehow... After all, we launched a bunch of cruise missiles the last time babies were killed. Funny how the BBC hangs the whole premise on their reporter's observations, and doesn't bother to follow it up with anything concrete. Yet, when the same flaw in logic was pointed out about the sarin attacks the other week (it making no sense for Assad to order chemical attacks since he was, and still is, winning), the same BBC dismissed it as ridiculous. The cognitive dissonance, along with dishonesty, is strong in this spin. Edited April 16, 2017 by Deranged Rhino
Tiberius Posted April 16, 2017 Posted April 16, 2017 It's the content of the article. He's advocating openly arming ISIS in Syria by giving them anti-aircraft weapons... And he is part of the deep state?
Deranged Rhino Posted April 16, 2017 Author Posted April 16, 2017 (edited) And he is part of the deep state? Where did I say he was? The ideas expressed in his shortsighted and highly provocative article (in the !@#$ing NYT) are though. *************************************** Changing gears: The U.S. Military Believes People Have a Sixth Sense "Since 1972, CIA and DoD research indicates that premonition, or precognition, appears to be weak in some, strong in others, and extraordinary in a rare few. Will the Navy’s contemporary work on “sensemaking,” the continuous effort to understand the connections among people, places, and events, finally unlock the mystery of ESP? Might technology available to today’s defense scientists reveal hypothe- ses not available to scientists in an earlier age?" http://time.com/4721715/phenomena-annie-jacobsen/ The article is worth reading in full, but the key points to take away: The US military has been extensively studying remote viewing, ESP, PK and telekinesis since the early 1960s (the article says the 70s, but that's wrong as FOIA documents can attest). That's half a century worth of treasure and research poured into those fields. What's interesting to note is that the research continues, under new names to avoid ridicule... Makes you wonder what they found that's worth continuing to funnel money and personnel down a rabbit hole the US Air Force assures people is very, very real. Edited April 16, 2017 by Deranged Rhino
TPS Posted April 16, 2017 Posted April 16, 2017 And he is part of the deep state? It's hard to say who is and who isn't in the MSM, but there are a lot of articles (I believe I've posted some in this thread) on the CIA's infiltration and use of the MSM. People can try to make it (the DS) out as some type of conspiracy theory, but when a (more than one actually) sitting president, and former general, warns the country about the forces that have a vested interest in maintaining the flow of money into the armaments trade, is it still a conspiracy theory? Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.DDE
TPS Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 Postol's critique of the "Assad did it" line has gone mainstream: Yahoo.com Hell has frozen over. I agree with something Ann wrote...http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/04/12/ann-coulter-lassie-come-home/
meazza Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 Postol's critique of the "Assad did it" line has gone mainstream: Yahoo.com Hell has frozen over. I agree with something Ann wrote...http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/04/12/ann-coulter-lassie-come-home/ That's because you're an idiot.
TPS Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 That's because you're an idiot.you can get banned for saying that without attribution.
meazza Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 you can get banned for saying that without attribution. No I can't. And agreeing with skeletor is automatic.
wnyguy Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 My question on this whole "deep state", illuminati type organization is, what is the end goal? When are they satisfied that their goals have been achieved?
row_33 Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 That's because you're an idiot. you can do better than that, bro...
Gary M Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 Postol's critique of the "Assad did it" line has gone mainstream: Yahoo.com Hell has frozen over. I agree with something Ann wrote...http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/04/12/ann-coulter-lassie-come-home/ So, what do you think changed from when Trump was bashing BO to today? Is it possible he has more info than Ann C.and the bombing was justified? Or is Ann correct and he just wants to thump his chest?
Deranged Rhino Posted April 18, 2017 Author Posted April 18, 2017 So, what do you think changed from when Trump was bashing BO to today? Is it possible he has more info than Ann C.and the bombing was justified? Or is Ann correct and he just wants to thump his chest? There are a lot of possibilities, certainly having more info being at the top of the list. For the purposes of this thread, and its content, there are more interesting possibilities. Speculations: A. The faction backing Trump lost to the globalists, and they forced Trump (either through deceit by staging the sarin attack, or through blackmail) to heel to the Deep State. The OP thesis has been there is a war behind the scenes, Trump may well have lost. B. The missile attack (of which 20 missiles went off target/didn't detonate) was a ruse, theater, designed to buy Trump's faction more time or perhaps provide enough rope to McMasters and the other globalists to hang themselves. The war is either over (which I'm not ready to call it quite yet) or 45 is playing 4D Chess (which would be... surprising).
Recommended Posts