Is Trump Destroying the Republic?

a reply to: JAGStorm

A lot of people believe the president is smart enough to destroy the 'deep state', let alone actually know what the 'deep state' is. Trump is different. Trump is hip.

The reality is that Trump is causing a lot of problems for both dems and pubs because he is ignorant. I'm 44 and I don't remember a time where this country has been so divided. This division is clearly because of one person in office.

I hate politics and feel that both dems and pubs are just 2 sides of the same coin. Corruption rampant through all sides, dems, pubs, libs.. one seems to hide it better than the other. Politics, it's all garbage and I can't believe people spend any significant amount of time even talking about it.

Even so, it has never been more clear that someone, possibly simply due to ignorance, is dividing and conquering. I think it's partly ignorance and partly self preservation though, and it's 100% business.

a reply to: spacemanjupiter

The reality is that Trump is causing a lot of problems for both dems and pubs because he is ignorant. I'm 44 and I don't remember a time where this country has been so divided. This division is clearly because of one person in office.

Pfft ... that division is clearly caused by the hostility of the left. Why can’t the left just accept he is President and try and help him do good things for their country. Trump doesn’t want division !! .. its the left pushing for it ! How blind are you to reality.

a reply to: Sheye

I see you haven't been paying much attention. Those top military men that "help him make decisions" have all rebuked Trump's decision to abandon our allies in Syria.

Trump has repeatedly and openly declared that he believes he is smarter and more informed than all of our top military men and intelligence officials serving our country.

In short, no one really advises him, and he doesn't read his daily briefings. He simply seeks to surround himself with "yes men" who will nod when he makes any suggestion. Anyone who challenges his suggestions, or provides him facts that disagree with his beliefs, are subject to twitter tirades, and/or being replaced.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

I'm not a specialist on military strategy or foreign affairs, but I am interested and fairly widely read in those fields. I'm not sure what you would consider evidential backup, as many of the negative reports regarding Trump's decision do come from corporate media, so, barring that, I'll give you my considered opinion.

First of all, it's clear that Mr. Trump made the decision impulsively, i.e. without consulting with military commanders in the chain of command, many of whom stated that they were totally taken by surprise. This squares with Trump's known tendencies to talk first. There are multiple instances both domestically and internationally in which Trump has displayed this tendency. In fact, among his supporters, this is seen as a refreshing trait, giving the virtual finger to the establishment and status quo.

To my mind, if those impulses had turned out to be well-framed and based on good info or the genius insight that the President often claims, the intuitive/impulsive thing wouldn't matter as much. However, time after time, it does not turn out that way.

Yes, in my opinion, I'd like to see our forces pulled back from most global adventuring, but that's not what is happening in this instance. Those forces pulled back from Syria are going to Iraq. A further 2000-3000 are being sent to Saudi. It's disingenous to claim that those who oppose this action are "warmongers" though unsurprising.

This isn't a de-escalation of anything, and it is REALLY difficult not to see this as another capitulation to Russian/Turkish geopolitical interests. Yes, Turkey is a member of NATO, but, Turkey is led currently by a totalitarian nutjob who loves him some Russia. Yes, Russia does greatly desire a stronghold in the geographic region; the only folks who could deny that are fools.

So, no net gain for the US but a gain for Russian interests. It's hard to believe that's a coincidence as it is a trend in the President's behavior.

On a more sentimental note: this is another US betrayal of the Kurdish people. There is no doubt that these groups in Syria were are partners if not allies in the fight against ISIS. This action on the President's part forced them to make a deal with Assad who is, again, in Russia's pocket. This action damages all future efforts to create alliances and coalitions, and its just wrong to abandon those who have shed blood with us.

That's a start. What's your take on the matter?

a reply to: Sheye

May I ask if this is irony or a serious statement?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Sheye

May I ask if this is irony or a serious statement?

Totally serious !

a reply to: redmage

Well I stand corrected.. my apologies.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Beautifully said and I agree 100000%!!!

a reply to: Gryphon66
My take on the matter was to stay right where we were, reinforce them even, and continue to build up the 21st century Israel on formerly Syrian land. Because I am ok with nation building and imperial expansion, and I do not beat around the bush about it either. Ironically, that is the only position that can be taken if one claims to have sympathy for the Kurds.

You can go through my thread history and pretty much see that is a common theme. However, you have not explained how this endangers American interests or security around the world. You even admitted that you have not been studying these events, so I would have to deduce you really cannot explain how the statement you made is true. I suppose you trust with a great degree what you hear from others.

I disagree with the retreat, but I do not repeat what I hear others say as a statement of truth without being able to explain it myself. I do not see any dangers to American interests or security within the 50 state union, in Europe, South Korea, Guam, Japan, the Philippines, Nigeria, Kenya, Colombia or everywhere else the MIC operates due to this retreat.

What the Defense Department is doing is simply repositioning these forces in western Iraq. It appears what has occurred is forcing Turkey to declare war with Syria officially. The cease fire is about over, and Sultan Erdogan is threatening that if Damascus does not pull its own troops from its own border to allow it to attack the Kurds, unless the Kurds are forced away from the border Turkey will consider it a declaration of war. In plain English that means Turkey will declare war on Syria if it does not force the Kurds out of the areas north of the M4 highway, or at least that is the word from advisor to Sultan Erdogan, Yasin Aktay.

Here is a Q&A from a YPG/US Marine Veteran who was over there for six months. Also not a fan of the retreat. It feels like Vietnam to me.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Hmmm. Okay, a few clarifications, and then I'll feel like I've duly responded to your request.

I actually did not say I haven't "studied these events" I stated that I'm not an expert. I also stated that I read a lot on both topics so your comment that I'm listening to someone else might be technically true, but unless you've been on the ground in Syria lately, so are you. We're both "taking the word of others" then aren't we?

As far as explaining myself, you seem to confuse agreeing with what I said with my ability to provide an explanation. You don't agree with me and I don't agree with what you've said particularly your implication that President Trump was somehow acting in concert with DoD policy.

Let's assume for the moment that you are correct, and that Turkey is going to war with Syria. In your opinion, that would not create a major destabilization of the area? Russia has stated repeatedly that they consider Syria an allied state and that she will defend their interests, and Turkey as so many point out, is a member of NATO.

You don't see a possible conflict drawing NATO into a war against Russia to be a threat to our national interests???

Fascinating.

Thanks for your opinions and the informative Youtube vids.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: pavil

If TPTB "wanted something" as your post phrases it, it would have happened. If it didn't happen, then they didn't.

The attack by Iran was inviting a military response from the US. I'm sure all the Hawks were drooling over the propect. We didn't and oil production was back to 100% in weeks.

One person can't destroy the Republic. It's taken the democrats decades of trying, to get to this point.

In what context do you reference here?
Did you live during the Reagan admin, do you have an actual Republic admin to compare to?

Or are you one of those people who only payed attention because the media told you to?

Maybe you've only been alive since the obuma admin, and the current political climate is all you know. If that's so, then I can assure you, this political climate is not normal.

It's manufactured to appear as a time of trouble, when it's nothing more than socialist leftist propaganda.

Republics are not destroyed over night or over four years.
Republics are destroyed from within, by a complacent population whom are willing to be duped

An ignorant voter base, is what may destroy the Republic.

If any single Individual holds any claim to destroying the Republic, it's obuma and his admin of communist sympathizers like Brennan and Comey.

President Trump has brought back employment opportunities and lowered the unemployment of minorities.

Where under the obuma admin, we were told to get used to not having jobs... remember?

Individuals don't bring down political systems, ignorant masses willing to be spoon fed lies, do.




The same can be said about any democratic politician, insert any of there names here and it's the same message.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: pavil

If TPTB "wanted something" as your post phrases it, it would have happened. If it didn't happen, then they didn't.

The attack by Iran was inviting a military response from the US. I'm sure all the Hawks were drooling over the propect. We didn't and oil production was back to 100% in weeks.

Hmmm ... must have been some reason that someone wanted a day or two of spiked oil futures then.

We refer commonly to "TPTB" and "Deep State" and all the other phrases that point to a shadowy cabal of individuals we that are actually in control of most world events. A belief in that group has a logical basis, but not necessarily an evidential one. Therefore statements made about that group are ... tenuous.

My point is this: IF that group had wanted war there would be war.

originally posted by: Sheye
a reply to: spacemanjupiter

The reality is that Trump is causing a lot of problems for both dems and pubs because he is ignorant. I'm 44 and I don't remember a time where this country has been so divided. This division is clearly because of one person in office.

Pfft ... that division is clearly caused by the hostility of the left. Why can’t the left just accept he is President and try and help him do good things for their country. Trump doesn’t want division !! .. its the left pushing for it ! How blind are you to reality.

Uh, so you're asking why folks who are being directly hurt by Trump don't just go along with Trump so that he can hurt them easier or more efficaciously?

a reply to: worldstarcountry

 It feels like Vietnam to me.

58,148 were killed and 304,000 wounded out of 2.7 million who served. How did those dominos fall in South East Asia? It's one of the engines of the world's economy now.

The Department of Defense (DOD) reports that the United States spent about $168 billion (worth around $950 billion in 2011 dollars) in the entire war including $111 billion on military operations (1965 – 1972) and $28.5 billion on economic and military aid to Saigon regime (1953 – 1975).

Was all that loss of blood and treasure worth it to now have the US be the third largest trading partner of Vietnam?

BTW, Afghanistan and Iraq have cost us 2.4 TRILLION.

We really, really don't need to keep fighting these endless wars.
Personally l'm done fighting such wars. What has it gotten us?

a reply to: Gryphon66

IF that group had wanted war there would be war

If?

You don't think there are groups out there that wish for the US to attack almost anyone? There are times and reasons to fight. I haven't seen the need to do it in Syria now that ISIS is no longer a pseudo-State.

If you want to topple Assad or create a Kurdish State, do it with someone else's Men and Women and Money.

originally posted by: ADVISOR
One person can't destroy the Republic. It's taken the democrats decades of trying, to get to this point.

Ha you are using old Klaus here? I'm not sure leveraging some hateful old bigot is going to do anything other than help people associate you with him (unless that was the point).

Also, easy mistake to make, but it is in fact the republicans who have been and are currently active in destroying the Republic. Hell, we may all yet get front row seats to witness it!

Glad to help

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Sheye
a reply to: spacemanjupiter

The reality is that Trump is causing a lot of problems for both dems and pubs because he is ignorant. I'm 44 and I don't remember a time where this country has been so divided. This division is clearly because of one person in office.

Pfft ... that division is clearly caused by the hostility of the left. Why can’t the left just accept he is President and try and help him do good things for their country. Trump doesn’t want division !! .. its the left pushing for it ! How blind are you to reality.

Uh, so you're asking why folks who are being directly hurt by Trump don't just go along with Trump so that he can hurt them easier or more efficaciously?

when did Nancy Pelosi get hurt? what happened to schifty Schiff that hurt him?? Did Trump steal Ice cream from Nadler??

where did the Maga hat touch you??

a reply to: thedigirati

Uh, I don't know about the named individuals you referenced, so perhaps you can ask them yourself?

Regarding the MAGA hat touching: Is that woman in your profile you? I like the thought if so that you (being a MAGA hat wearer) would wanna cuddle.

First, the CFR runs foreign policy in the US. It is an unelected group of people. Second, the US military is also run by CFR and every Sec of Defense since Eisenhower has been CFR. Third, Gen Mattis has attended Bilderberg meetings.
Now, this is what the CFR is about

But it's even worse than that. “The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence, and submergence into an all-powerful one-world government,” the admiral warned, adding that “this lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of the United States is pervasive throughout most of the membership.” In other words, not everyone in the CFR is a fanatical globalist determined to sell out America's sovereignty, but most are.

www.thenewamerican.com...