Trump gives classified info to russians

Post Reply New Topic

Okay, that's clearer. I tend to take everything literally. Damn this Asperger's!

I can understand why he would want to restore his nation to what it was before, or to something similar. Every leader wants what is best for his or her country, that's not a surprise.



Well, when one is the leader of a nation that is constantly demonised in the Western press, it's easy to see why he would come to believe that in order for his nation to even survive he must push back, and hard. The (former Soviet) Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania now belong to N.A.T.O. There are American bases in Central Asia. How would you like it if there were Soviet (or Russian) bases in Canada and Mexico? That's how close they are. His country is being encircled. Why?



The accusation of interference again, based upon misinformation and gossip on slow news days.



I don't belong to the "right". Some of my views would be considered to be "far left" (ex. I fully support universal health care - we've had it in Australia for decades now - I despise all religions, hate tax-dodging corporations, believe that the U.S. has such a high homicide rate due to - among other things - the hopelessly inadequate control of firearms, and will always stand with the poor and disadvantaged against the slander that is often directed our way - ex. the obscene generalisation that "those who are on welfare are drug-addicts too lazy to work").

That seems more like a disproved rumor considering Trumps actions against Putin's ally Assad by bombing his airbases.
That's a major demonstration of Trump going against Putin. So what's something that stands out showing Trump is doing Putin's bidding?

In fact, Assad had had warning from Trump through Putin to remove all aircraft and other equipment prior to the bombing. If anything, the bombing of the Syrian airfield was more show for the west who disapproved of Assad's attacks on civilians.

According to what I read the warning was given so that personnel could be evacuated. And that it was done through military channels using a special (pre-Trump) deconfliction line established for that sort of thing, rather than like Trump personally phoning Putin.

But the question still remains, was the order to have the airbase bombed something Putin wanted Trump to do? And what has Trump done that indicates Putin is controlling him?

The mechanisms for putting just that in place, such as Kushner trying to establish back channels to the Kremlin, may very well have been discovered. That, and Trump's plans to destabilize NATO is too advantageous for Putin to think that that's just a coincidence.

The mechanisms for putting just that in place, such as Kushner trying to establish back channels to the Kremlin, may very well have been discovered. That, and Trump's plans to destabilize NATO is too advantageous for Putin to think that that's just a coincidence.

I'll look into that. If Trump is colluding with Putin to destabilize NATO while being investigated for collusion, it shouldn't be that hard for them to nail him.

I was wondering if you had any thoughts on how Clinton might have reacted regarding Assad.

Worst case scenario, Clinton would have continued the failed policies of her immediate two predecessors in the Middle East.

Well I've done some looking over the NATO situation and it seems according to Neil Cavuto of Fox, you guys are all wrong about it I do actually go to Fox sometimes, but just to get the harder right perspective on things.

I am delighted you aren't to the far right on the issues you've named off. But the fact is, those people who support Trump in my country are the very same people who take the opposite political stance you do.

Well, at least we don't disagree on everything, but if it's not too much to ask, can you address the question I asked regarding the (very real) encirclement of Russia by forces hostile to it? Why, since 1989/1990 and the absorption of the GDR by West Germany, has it been an almost constant feature in world politics? As an example, why did Barack Obama when he was President, think it to be such a good idea to place a "missile defence shield" as they called it in Poland? The excuse was "to deter Iran, and intercept any missiles coming from that general direction", but as anyone who knows anything at all about geography will be able to tell you, this makes no sense whatsoever. A more logical choice for the interception of missiles coming from Iran, would have been Turkey, which is a) much, much closer to Iran (they actually share a border), and b) actually lies on the path that any such missile would travel on its way to Western Europe. This "defence shield" was CLEARLY aimed at undermining Russia's strategic forces, and thus creating an advantage for the West. It was a destabilising move. What were they thinking?