Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

For discussion of secret combinations (political, economic, spiritual, religious, etc.) (Ether 8:18-25.)
Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

Our unjust war with North Korea did not go away.

Once more, for the stubborn Trump supporters, McMaster is CFR. People make policy. Your defense of Trump is as traitorous as McMaster's implementation of CFR policy.

http://news.antiwar.com/2017/08/20/whit ... rth-korea/

White House Continues to Talk Up ‘Preventative War’ Against North Korea
McMaster Seen Leading Advocates of Attacking North Korea Outright
Jason Ditz Posted on August 20, 2017

While there has been a concerted effort from some members of the Trump Administration to downplay the risk of an imminent nuclear war with North Korea, the possibility of such a conflict is still palpable, with White House officials openly talking about launch a “preventative war” to resolve the situation.

National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is seen as one of the leading advocates of this idea, which seeks to avoid the question of how much of a threat North Korea will pose in the future by just attacking them outright now, consequences be damned.

But this position also fits neatly into President Trump’s own “fire and fury” narrative, and Trump has repeatedly given the impression in recent weeks that he considers attacking North Korea out of the blue a viable option, albeit one of many that are under consideration.

South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in has tried to reject this idea, insisting South Korea has an inherent right to “veto” any US war against North Korea. Yet Defense Secretary James Mattis and other US officials have consistently dodged that question since Moon made the claim, and are mostly couching the war as about the US, as opposed to defending South Korea.

This casts a big shadow over the new US military exercises in South Korea this week, with North Korea openly warning that they are watching for any reckless escalation during the operation, and that they believe the war could quickly go nuclear if the exercise turned into “actual fighting.”

Such a US sneak attack under the guise of military drills would likely be condemned region-wide, but the even bigger problem is that, no matter how the US decides to start this war, doing so will have massive fallout for the region, and particularly for South Korea.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

Because nothing says winning like continuing to implement the same old failed policies in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history. I guess being American these days means nothing more than giving the government the right to kill you any time they want to. That's right, Mr. Marmalade, just load our youth in planes and send them off to die in the Graveyard of Empires. Thank you very much for stealing them away from us and for stealing their dreams away from them although I distinctly remember you saying some nonsense DURING THE CAMPAIGN about less intervention in foreign affairs. You stuck to the NWO Script For First Time Presidential Candidates so well, Mr. Marmalade.

But wait, there's more!!! If you act now, the government will not only steal your flesh and blood, they'll also keep it all a secret from the public. That's right, you Trumpsters. The government, in its wisdom, has decided to stop telling us how many troops they're sending overseas. Great!!! We can be betrayed in ignorance now. What a relief.

http://news.antiwar.com/2017/08/21/trum ... ghanistan/

Trump Declares Open-Ended War in Afghanistan
Trump Abandons 'Instinct to Withdraw'
Jason Ditz Posted on August 21, 2017Categories NewsTags Afghanistan, Trump
In his Monday night speech on the Afghan War, President Trump committed the US to an essentially open-ended escalation of the conflict without any specific limitations, while granting commanders broader authority to unilaterally target “the enemy.”

President Trump stressed that his first instinct was to withdraw. He added that “historically I like following my instincts.” However, he said that “decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the oval office.” He added that he’s committed to “an honorable and enduring outcome” worthy of the longest war in American history and the large number of dead.

What that outcome looks like, or how specifically he plans to get there are anyone’s guess. Fox News reported that White House sources told them before the speech that Trump was going to announce 4,000 more troops for Afghanistan.

But President Trump said that the US strategy would be secret, saying the US is removing any timetables for ending the war in Afghanistan. He said that he will not talk publicly about troop numbers in Afghanistan or plans for ongoing military activity there. While arguing that “America’s enemies must never know our plans.”

Trump’s secrecy also means the American public will have no idea how the Afghan War is being prosecuted.

This mirrors the decision to make troop levels in Iraq and Syria officially secret, but is also a much broader commitment. He set the stage for general escalation of an Afghan war that, over the past 16 years, has shown itself to endure through more or less any escalation conceivable. In committing to continue that war until victory, Trump effectively made the war permanent.

Trump presented continuation as both about 9/11, and about how opposed he is to the 2011 US withdrawal from Iraq, each presented as a reason not to withdraw, but seemingly each an excuse that’s never going to not stand in the way of ending the war.

The broad message of Trump’s speech seemed to be that the US wasn’t aggressive enough in Afghanistan so far, criticizing President Obama for “micromanaging” the conflict. Trump said he believes that US military victories come from “judgement and expertise of wartime commanders.”

Trump gave some lip-service to economic aid for Afghanistan, particularly pushing India to “do more.” But he insisted that the US had abandoned nation-building, declaring “we are not nation-building again, we’re killing terrorists.”

This declaration also gives the impression of a permanent war, claiming 20 distinct terrorist organizations between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and vowing to lift restrictions on “our warfighters.” He vowed that “no place is out of the reach of American might.”

Ultimately, an escalation of 4,000 troops and a re-commitment to the status quo likely would’ve been much milder than what Trump appears to be proposing. Trump’s determination to keep troop levels secret leaves the door open to a series of endless escalations down the road, which the American public are liable to never hear about.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-2 ... ocon-trump

In Angry Tweetstorm, Ron Paul Lashes Out At "Neocon" Trump

Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Aug 21, 2017 10:32 PM
31
SHARES
Roughly around the time Trump started his Afghanistan speech, Ron Paul tweeted out a cautiously optimistic note: "Hoping for the best in tonight's @realDonaldTrump speech but fearful that foreign intervention is only going to get worse. #Afghanistan." Alas it was not meant to be, and over 20 tweets later in what proved to be the angriest tweetstorm of the night, Ron Paul had come to a conclusion: Trump is now nothing more than the latest neocon, one whom even Lindsey Graham applauded.

Below is a chronological rundown of Ron Paul's progressively angier tweets, as he was live commenting on Trump's speech:

Hoping for the best in tonight's @realDonaldTrump speech but fearful that foreign intervention is only going to get worse. #Afghanistan
Steve Bannon brakes removed. Neocons feeling their oats.
The military personnel are the victims of bad foreign policy.
Sad that these wars the politicians argue for are unconstitutional yet we are told we are over there defending the Constitution.
Mr. President it's too bad you do not follow your instincts.
Planned in Afghanistan? What about Saudi Arabia??
What's wrong with rapid exit? We just marched in we can just march out.
So far very discouraging. Sounds like pure neocon foreign policy.
The promoters of war win. The American people lose. #Afghanistan
Remember: there was no al-Qaeda until our foolish invasion of Iraq based on neocon lies.
The American people deserve to know when we are going to war and MUST give you permission through their representatives in Congress!
Emphasis on Pakistan just means the war going to be expanded!
Emphasis on military alliance with India may well lead to more vicious war between nuclear states Pakistan and India. Smart?
Terrorism is one thing, but what about massive collateral damage? Killing civilians creates more terrorism. Round and round we go.
Shorter Trump: "Afghanistan: give us your minerals!"
Nothing new. More of the same. Obama was wrong. This is NOT the good war. Sooner we get out the better.
More killing is not the road to peace.
The emphasis on the "grave danger" of terrorism is greatly exaggerated. But more intervention surely creates more terrorism.
How many Americans are really sitting around worrying about an Afghan terrorist coming over and killing them?
So many of our problems are self-inflicted by a deeply flawed foreign policy. US troops - and the family members - suffer the consequences.
Big issue of the night: US expanding the war into Pakistan. Could precipitate more conflict between nuclear India and Pakistan.
If Americans are tired of 16 year war, how will they feel about another decade or two? When will they wake up?
Our ultimately "hasty" departure from Vietnam finally ended a lot of grief. Even if it came way too late.
Beware! @LindseyGrahamSC loves Trump's speech! Why are arch-neocons celebrating so much? Very telling!
There's nothing hasty about ending America's longest war. @POTUS bowed to military-industrial establishment; doubled down on perpetual war.
Based on Trump's speech, Ron Paul's concerns are well founded. Then again, as we await Breitbart's response to Trump's adress one thing is certain: Steve Bannon will not be happy with what "neocon" Trump said tonight, even if the WaPo and NYT are now on "mute" mode when it comes to NSA-sourced, anti-Trump scoops.

And while there is a distinct possibility that tomorrow night, when addressing his increasingly shaky core support base, Trump will change his mind, with two generals whispering in his ear constantly to determine US foreign policy even as two ex-Goldmanites now write domestic US policy, it is quite likely that the Trump who was unveiled tonight, is the Trump that will stay with the US population for the indefinite future. And if for some reason the "new and improved" Trump slips and fades away again... well there's always the Mueller "Russia collusion" probe in the background keeping the president on his toes.

Update: Here's Breitbart's take, as expected.
Liar liar.jpg
Liar liar.jpg (58.53 KiB) Viewed 1353 times

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/ ... -home-from

OPINION | Sen. Rand Paul: 16 years on, it's past time to bring our troops home from Afghanistan
BY SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY.), OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 08/21/17 06:15 PM EDT 724

The Trump administration is increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan and, by doing so, keeping us involved even longer in a 16-year-old war that has long since gone past its time.

The mission in Afghanistan has lost its purpose, and I think it is a terrible idea to send any more troops into that war. It’s time to come home now.

Our war in Afghanistan began in a proper fashion. We were attacked on 9/11. The Taliban, who then controlled Afghanistan, were harboring al Qaeda, and after being warned, and after an authorization from Congress, our military executed a plan to strike back. Had I been in Congress then, I would have voted to authorize this military action.
But as is typical, there was significant mission creep in Afghanistan. We went from striking back against those who attacked us, to regime change, to nation-building, to policing their country for them. And we do it all now with an authorization that is flimsy at best, with the reason blurred, and the costs now known. We do it with an authorization that was debated and passed before some of our newest military personnel were out of diapers. This isn’t fair to them, to the American people, or to a rational foreign policy.

The Afghanistan war going beyond its original mission has an enormous cost. First and most important is the cost to our troops. Deaths, injuries and unnecessary deployments causing harm to families are certainly the most important reason as to why you don’t go to wars that aren’t necessary.

Then comes the taxpayer. We have spent over $1 trillion in Afghanistan, and nearly $5 trillion on Middle East wars in the past 15 years. Would we not be better off with $5 trillion less in debt or using these funds in other, more productive ways?

Nation-building should not be our job, and it has consistently been a fool’s errand for us, particularly in this region. There is no reason to believe we can do it in Afghanistan, and certainly no reason to believe we can do it without a permanent, costly presence in the country.

So I strongly disagree with the administration’s actions here. I’ve spoken to the president, and I know he wants to end this war. We’ve all heard him say it. But talk won’t get it done. Although I’ve been informed that the president rejected larger expansions of troops than the one announced this week, that’s not good enough. He should have rejected this one and stuck to his principles. He knows this war is over, and he – unlike the last two presidents – should have the guts to end it for real, on his watch.

Regardless of the argument over the number of troops, I also will insist my colleagues take up a larger argument over the power to declare war. I believe we have allowed the executive to exercise far too much power in recent years.

This is one of the reasons I objected just before the recess when the Senate moved to consider the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). I have an amendment that I will insist be considered that would repeal the 2001 AUMF on Afghanistan. That AUMF is outdated, overcome by events, and provides a feeble bit of cover for people who still want to be there.

If the president and my colleagues want to continue the war in Afghanistan, then at the very least Congress should vote on it. I’ll insist they do this fall, and I’ll be leading the charge for “no.”

User avatar
ExtraCelestial
captain of 10
Posts: 20

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by ExtraCelestial »

A user mentioned WHY? all these presidents have been sloughed into the same category of killers, etc. In the same breath, the same user stated secret combos. IMO, when POTUS is placed into office, he will be immediately caught up into a secret combo, likely with a Master Mahan level handler. If they dont enter into their secret combo, they and/or their families will be killed off, and threatened appropriately under the oaths sake. After they submit to these terms, they are controlled and managed under the oath to further Satan's work on the earth (gold, silver, armies, navies..... For instance, imagine all the promises that are made by all parties when vying for POTUS and then none of them commit to those promises or cant, because it doesnt fit into the planned narrative that Satan has over this nation. For someone, anyone, to think that Secret Combos are not abound across the world; especially within the US Gov, they should carefully consider their understanding of Moroni's promise centuries ago. Satan is no idiot and know if he controls the US government, he controls the world plain and simple. I try really hard not to over complicate politics and to peel back the layers of crap that surround and shroud Satan's dominion.

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by lundbaek »

http://arizonafreedomalliance.ning.com/ ... hare_topic

Craigslist Ad Exposes Tonight’s Trump Event Had PAID ACTOR PROTESTERS!
Posted by Arizona Freedom Alliance on August 23, 2017 at 12:36pm in BEWARE: Dems at Work

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

lundbaek wrote: August 23rd, 2017, 5:26 pm http://arizonafreedomalliance.ning.com/ ... hare_topic

Craigslist Ad Exposes Tonight’s Trump Event Had PAID ACTOR PROTESTERS!
Posted by Arizona Freedom Alliance on August 23, 2017 at 12:36pm in BEWARE: Dems at Work
That's true, lundbaek, but try to figure out who really profits from all the contention. Can you see an imposition of martial law? Can you see a reduction of our freedoms? Who would implement those new restrictions? Trump would, not Antifa.

And for those desperate to attack me, no, of course I'm not defending Antifa. Their actions and goals are despicable.

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by lundbaek »

It is my opinion that most of the contention is fomented by globalists trying to force Trump out of office because he poses a real block to many of their machinations calculated to expedite the globalist agenda. I believe President Trump is still largely oblivious to the globalist agenda and the machinations being fomented to foster that agenda. His surrounding himself with people who I believe are globalists and/or desirous to oust him from office indicates to me that he is just plain ignorant of the secret combinations conspiring against our constitutional republic. I have written Trump advising him about these things, and others of my acquaintance have also.

It seems to me Silver believes Trump may have been deceiving us all along. I'm not to that point yet. I haven't paid all that much attention to him, as I did not vote for Trump or for Hillary, of course, so I didn't expect much from him to begin with. But it is increasingly obvious to me that those murderous combinations that Moroni warned us about have gotten well above us.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

How can the continued killing of innocent people be justified?

http://theantimedia.org/media-afghanist ... civilians/

Mainstream Media Reporting on Afghanistan Escalation Conveniently Omits Dead Civilians
August 24, 2017 at 8:49 am
Written by Anti-Media News Desk

(FAIR) — As President Donald Trump tries to make the case for staying indefinitely in Afghanistan, the stakes for those actually living there are rarely broached by US corporate media.

In dozens of write-ups, recaps and reports on Trump’s “major” Afghan War speech, almost no outlets took time out to note the plight or condition of the people the US is nominally there to save. The New York Times (8/21/17, 8/22/17), Washington Post (8/21/17), Chicago Tribune (8/22/17), CNN (8/21/17, 8/21/17), NBC News (8/21/17), ABC News (8/21/17) and CBS News (8/21/17), among others, didn’t mention the Afghan death toll at all in their summary of events in the region.

Almost all, however, reserved airtime and column inches to mention the number of US soldiers and cost to the US treasury—presumably the only moral metric that matters. One notable exception was Ali Velshi at MSNBC (8/21/17), who did mention live on air how many Afghans were killed in the first half of 2017—a scope curiously limited to the term of the current Republican president, but an improvement on silence nonetheless.

US media also continued their rich tradition of not blaming the US or Trump for the war—instead laying responsibility at the feet of some unknown geopolitical dark matter that has forced the US to occupy Afghanistan permanently. The US isn’t waging ongoing war in the Central Asian country; it is simply “stuck,” according to the AP (8/21/17) and the Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty. Trump isn’t continuing the occupation; according to the Sacramento Bee (8/21/17); he “Keeps US Stuck in Afghanistan Quagmire.” The US doesn’t seek further war and occupation, but to “break free from the quagmire,” the Chicago Tribune(8/22/17) spells out.* Bush, Obama and Trump didn’t make a deliberate choice to bomb Afghanistan, according to PBS’s Judy Woodruff (8/21/17); attacking the country just became “the burden of three presidents.” War was consistently depicted as being thrust upon the US government by forces outside of its control.

The number of Afghan civilians killed during the 16-year US military occupation is well over 31,000, according to researchers at Brown University. The average American couldn’t possibly know this fact, since it’s almost never mentioned when weighing the cost/benefit ratio of further military occupation and bombing.

Just as the thousands killed in Yemen by US-backed Saudi bombing don’t inform coverage of the famine there, the causal effect of US military action on poor, faceless brown people is never clearly laid out. The US bombs and, on a totally separate note, people are dying. That the United States may be causing the suffering, and could choose to stop doing so, is never really considered, much less argued in any meaningful way.

*The Chicago Tribune editorial does mention civilian deaths, referring to a 2016 UN report, but the paper attributes them solely to “ambushes and suicide bomb attacks” by insurgent forces, whereas the UN holds the US and the US-backed government responsible for nearly a quarter of the carnage there. The Tribune also misstates the UN civilian death toll more than threefold, confusing deaths with casualties (which include injuries).

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »

Please, no war.

http://www.unz.com/emargolis/listen-to-those-or-elses/

Listen to Those 'Or Elses'
ERIC MARGOLIS • SEPTEMBER 2, 2017

Old Chinese saying: ‘when elephants battle, ants get crushed.’ Think of the current crisis on the Korean Peninsula in which the government in Seoul has been all but ignored.

South Korea’s newly elected president, Moon Jae-in, keeps insisting that the US must not launch war against North Korea without South Korea’s agreement.

President Donald Trump and the US media appear not to have heard Moon’s pleas, or are simply disregarding them.

Amazingly, six decades after the end of the 1950 Korean War, South Korea’s 650,000-man active armed forces and 4.2 million-man reserves remain under the command of a US four-star general. This neo-colonial arrangement was supposed to have ended years ago, but successive conservative South Korean governments maintained their nation’s acceptance of Washington’s Asian Raj. So does Japan.

The most recent South Korean rightist leader, Park Guen-hye, was ousted for alleged corruption and is now in jail awaiting trial. Many of South Korea’s rightists are Protestant Christians – as was the US-backed Korean War leader, strongman Syngman Rhee. South Korea’s Christians are ardently anti-Communist and support war against North Korea. Whatever happened to turn the other cheek?

President Moon, an anti-war moderate leftist, keeps calling for a peaceful solution to the present crisis. Most South Koreans back him. As I’ve found on my many assignments in Korea, most Southerners shrug off the threat from North Korea – or even laugh it off. They certainly don’t want a full-scale war on their front door. The 1950-53 conflict left at least 2.5 million Korean civilians dead and most of the peninsula’s major cities bombed flat by US B-29’s.

North Korea, by contrast, constantly harangues South Koreans that their nation is a US ‘puppet’ and ‘colony’ run by traitors. Pyongyang insists that North Korea is the authentic Korean state while the South is a mere US/Japanese colony. Many young South Koreans absorb such claims; some are even proud of North Korea for standing up to the mighty United States even though South Korea’s economy is 45 times larger than that of threadbare North Korea.

Kim Jong-il’s bombastic challenge to President Trump is emboldening Korean nationalists. Many point to the fact that North Korea developed nuclear weapons and delivery systems on its own while South Korea was stopped from doing so by US pressure in the 1970’s.

At the same time, North Koreans are jumping for joy that their nation just launched a medium-range missile over Japan that panicked and humiliated the much hated Japanese. The missile launch came on the anniversary of Japan’s takeover of Korea as a colony in 1910. Imperial Japan exploited and humiliated the proud Koreans, treating them as sub-humans. Koreans have never forgotten. Many long for revenge.
That’s what Kim Jong-un is doing.

The second North Korean missile to fly over Japan makes painfully clear that Japan must have nuclear weapons to defend itself, something this writer has been urging for years.

Otherwise, the world’s number three economy is utterly naked to its foes, who include North Korea and China. Emphasizing the point, this week air raid sirens wailed in various parts of Japan, giving the population a big scare and undermining respect for its conservative government.

Point defense missiles – Japan’s current response – won’t give it adequate protection. As France’s Maginot Line so dramatically showed, fixed defenses can be overcome by spirited, innovative offensives. To defend itself, Japan – and perhaps South Korea – need massive retaliatory capability. But even then, if there is a north Asian nuclear conflict, it’s likely North Korea will save at least one or two nuclear missiles for revenge against Japan.

China’s Foreign Ministry has proposed the obvious, sensible solution to this trumped-up crisis: the US to cease its provocative annual air, land and naval demonstration around North Korea’s borders in return for the North outing a moratorium on its provocative missile tests. So far, Washington has refused this sensible solution.

Meanwhile, in a little-noticed, menacing statement, China’s Ministry of Defense just warned that China ‘would not allow’ US or South Korea troops to enter North Korea. This is a very serious warning that deserves utmost attention in Washington.

It reminds me of Imperial Russia’s warning Austro-Hungary not to invade Serbia in the fall of 1914 – or else. The ‘or else’ came: World War I. And, of course, Mao’s China warning US Gen. Douglas MacArthur not to cross the Yalu River in 1950 – or else. Soon after, 500,000 Chinese troops invaded Korea.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by Silver »


lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Read it well, Bush/Obama/Trump Supporters

Post by lundbaek »

As I recall, UN land forces did not cross the Yalu River during the Korean War. U.S. and possible ROK aircraft did fly across the Yalu, in some cases in accordance with U.N. rules of engagement, sometimes not.

Post Reply