Trump: We're not going into Syria

Well.. I guess we dodged the bullet after all. I'm really not sure we need the issues with Russia. Adding the fact that the whole chemical attack has false flag written all over it. Trump said in a fox business interview "we're not going into syria" as followed:

“We’re not going into Syria,” Trump told Maria Bartiromo during an exclusive interview on FOX Business. “But when I see people using horrible, horrible chemical weapons… and see these beautiful kids that are dead in their father's arms, or you see kids gasping for life … when you see that, I immediately called General Mattis.”

Although it may avoid war with Russia (for now). He went on to say:

“If Russia didn’t go in and back this animal [Assad], you wouldn’t have a problem right now,” Trump said.

www.foxbusiness.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Link

a reply to: LongishLongo

Trump got the completely insane liberals cheering him on.

Enough said.

Giant asteriod sounds good for breakfast

originally posted by: Idreamofme
Trump got the completely insane liberals cheering him on.

The guy's a narcissist. He's losing his conservative base as he shows more of his Blue Dog Democrat colors. He _needs_ that cheering squad. All I can say is: Glad he screwed Hillary out of the Presidency.

As far as us not going into Syria ... there's something much bigger brewing in the Far East.

a reply to: LongishLongo

Well then, free reign for Assad.

We're not going into Syria. Not until Trump completely reverses his position again in 48 hours. Gotta love not knowing what the Hell is really going on in the world.

I really had hope for Trump, but this continual reversal merry-go-round crap has to stop.

a reply to: LongishLongo

Misdirection is the art of making the right people believe the wrong thing at the right time.

originally posted by: Wookiep
We're not going into Syria. Not until Trump completely reverses his position again in 48 hours. Gotta love not knowing what the Hell is really going on in the world.

That's probably the worst part. They don't seem to have any long term plans at all, apparently just making policy decisions on a whim.

a reply to: Wookiep

Hahaha,not going in,I think that's the biggest lie I've heard from anyone in the last good while.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

He did have a long term plan.

Then he saw dead babies on tv.

Then he called general mattis.

Now hes back to regularly scheduled long term plan.

Give the man a break, everyone hates dead babies.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I can only hope it's some strategic ploy, otherwise all it's doing is causing confusion and creating a back-lash among his supporters.

On the surface, it really does appear to be what you are suggesting. That is NOT a good thing for the security of the nation. This admin better get it together or Trump may have both sides looking for immediate impeachment.

The conspiratorial mind may point out that this could be the plan all along....

He has said time and time again he wont broadcast whats going to happen.

What, you expected him to say '' Yes, we are going to go into Syria ''

We don't need to go in, the air force can destroy Assad in a day!

a reply to: Idreamofme

Yeah, he hates seeing dead innocent Syrians so much that he's allowing them to seek refuge here. Oh wait, he's added Syria twice to his lists of banned countries for immigrants. Yeah, quite the "good Samaritan"...

IMO, you have to read between the lines. When President Trump says "We're not going into Syria", he's referring to a large USA ground force. Everything else is on the table however.

a reply to: Idreamofme

He made the decision within 48 hours of said "chem attack".

He did not allow for an actual investigation.

The Russians and Syrians presented a completely different story that was ignored.

The Russians now believe it was a false flag to cause public support for regime change.

Many Trump supporters disapprove of this due to the prior situation in 2013 where Obama, McCain and Kerry wanted to bomb the # out of Syria but did not get congressional approval due to the same public out-lash in 2013. MORE evidence suggested that the "rebels" had staged the chem attack and NOT Assad's regime. This was ignored by the media.

Fast forward. We are in the SAME situation, except that Trump did not even BOTHER with getting congressional approval. This REEKS of typical establishment false flag BS. Trump may very well have been compromised by the "deep state" and establishment.

That SUCKS for Trump, because his supporters are MUCH smarter than this.

Here is what the Russians think-

Idlib ‘chemical attack’ was false flag to set Assad up, more may come – Putin

Many Trump supporters are seeing this exact same thing. Some of which, are Ron Paul supporters. Their hope is decreasing every time this crap keeps happening. Trump needs better intel.


The neo politicians from both sides of the fence are now winning. The neolibs and neocons are out in full force all with total support from the media in all directions.

RED FLAG. WAKE UP!!

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: Idreamofme
Trump got the completely insane liberals cheering him on.

The guy's a narcissist. He's losing his conservative base as he shows more of his Blue Dog Democrat colors. He _needs_ that cheering squad. All I can say is: Glad he screwed Hillary out of the Presidency.

As far as us not going into Syria ... there's something much bigger brewing in the Far East.

Lets not pretend the Republican's of our era aren't 'historically' all about the wars.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Trump's a Republican?
Are you sure?

a reply to: Wookiep

Not just confusion with his supporters. How can any allies or organizations be expected to cooperate with such instability? Many large projects take years and even decades to be completed. That's why multinationals, investors, and other large organizations crave political stability first. "Instability", "political instability", and "instability in the region" are commonly used phrases when justifying regime change for a reason.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Trump's a Republican?
Are you sure?

I would have never liked him if they did.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

So, you're in favor of destabilizing Syria?

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
"Instability", "political instability", and "instability in the region" are commonly used phrases when justifying regime change for a reason.

Yet ruthless instablity is all that ever seems to come from "nation building" / "regime change", and ObamaHillaryCo. went all in on that stuff when he was at the helm, and as such one of the main reasons I've been so unrelenting against liberal types is when it was Obama doing it liberals still defend him in general to the death.