Page 1 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

22 Apr 2017, 4:26 am

I wonder if Trump supporters are having reservations especially with Trump appearing more hawkish, which was one reason why people voted against Clinton.

Aslo with any action the has to be a long term plan and core message. In the past people were more accepting that a plan was in place even if they were aware of what that is, nowadays that is not longer acceptable. So if you make a military strike, then it need to be clear what the objective is. Is it for instance with he intention of weakening Assad, so he will fall? Or is it more a warning, and if so what is the follow through? Given that IS is a bigger threat to national security, is there concern amoung supporters that we may have a repeat of what happened in Libya, Iraq and Syria? Leading to IS regaining territory and influence, or if not making the US more of a target?

I suspect Trump will be a one term president. He may be more of a compromise than some have made out. I think he will be more led than leader than he made out in his campaign. However I think there are just too many screwballs in his administration who are going to cause issues for him, and his experience is extremely limited an not very transferable.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

22 Apr 2017, 9:48 am

What was the alternative to voting for Trump? I can never have reservations about voting for Trump considering who we saved the country from. What concerns me more is this undemocratic deep state refusing to cede power, I haven't trust the military or the 'intelligence' community since the illegal targeting of General Flynn. Mattis and McMaster's seem like neocons or at least huge hawks who are virulently anti-Russian, them a long with Ivanka/Jared Kushner seem like a problem as far as foreign policy goes. It's hard to speculate since this administration purposely doesn't want people to know what it is thinking, it seems like they are applying Nixon's 'madman theory' in the modern day. I don't trust Pence or a lot of the appointed Republican officials, someone like Nikki Haley is just a neocon running her mouth at the UN.

If Trump can get China on board with dealing with North Korea then I think that's a good thing and is indicative of his deal making ability. North Korea's nuclear program and growing instability are a threat to everyone in the reason not to mention the threat of proliferation. If North Korea actually acquired ICBM range nuclear weapons then I think they'll be demanding a bit more than a few more food rations.

Trump's foreign policy right now seems more theatrical than anything else, shooting cruise missiles at Assad and dropping the MOAB on ISIS in Afghanistan are about sending a message(to NK, to China, to Iran, to whoever) rather than achieving a military goal. We'll see where things go from here, I don't think anybody thought Trump was a pacifist and part of the 'peace thru strength' doctrine is demonstrating that strength and a willingness to use it when necessary. Things will have changed if they moved to eject Assad or partake in some major nation building effort.

I am hopeful that Trump's first face to face meeting with Putin is a good one and that they can work out some deals, I am sure the neocons don't even want them to be in the same room together but that's what needs to happen. All our allies stress the importance of working with Russia except the most anti-Russian states, our relationship shouldn't be determined by the tiny countries in between us which is the issue with NATO. Would you start WWIII over Estonia? I wouldn't.

We'll see where things go.



the_phoenix
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,489
Location: up from the ashes

22 Apr 2017, 10:38 am

President Trump is doing exactly what he said he would during the campaign "I would bomb the s**t out of ISIS."



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,960
Location: Long Island, New York

22 Apr 2017, 12:42 pm

Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump? I can never have reservations about voting for Trump considering who we saved the country from. What concerns me more is this undemocratic deep state refusing to cede power, I haven't trust the military or the 'intelligence' community since the illegal targeting of General Flynn. Mattis and McMaster's seem like neocons or at least huge hawks who are virulently anti-Russian, them a long with Ivanka/Jared Kushner seem like a problem as far as foreign policy goes. It's hard to speculate since this administration purposely doesn't want people to know what it is thinking, it seems like they are applying Nixon's 'madman theory' in the modern day. I don't trust Pence or a lot of the appointed Republican officials, someone like Nikki Haley is just a neocon running her mouth at the UN.

If Trump can get China on board with dealing with North Korea then I think that's a good thing and is indicative of his deal making ability. North Korea's nuclear program and growing instability are a threat to everyone in the reason not to mention the threat of proliferation. If North Korea actually acquired ICBM range nuclear weapons then I think they'll be demanding a bit more than a few more food rations.

Trump's foreign policy right now seems more theatrical than anything else, shooting cruise missiles at Assad and dropping the MOAB on ISIS in Afghanistan are about sending a message(to NK, to China, to Iran, to whoever) rather than achieving a military goal. We'll see where things go from here, I don't think anybody thought Trump was a pacifist and part of the 'peace thru strength' doctrine is demonstrating that strength and a willingness to use it when necessary. Things will have changed if they moved to eject Assad or partake in some major nation building effort.

I am hopeful that Trump's first face to face meeting with Putin is a good one and that they can work out some deals, I am sure the neocons don't even want them to be in the same room together but that's what needs to happen. All our allies stress the importance of working with Russia except the most anti-Russian states, our relationship shouldn't be determined by the tiny countries in between us which is the issue with NATO. Would you start WWIII over Estonia? I wouldn't.

We'll see where things go.


Just theatrical either gets your bluff called or your seriousness misunderstood.

He has not drained the swamp.

There are people who voted for him that did so knowing it was a big risk but thought it was better than the alternative. That is understandable. It is the people that idealized him in a similar vain to a rock star I have problems with. All the signs were pretty obvoius we were going to get what we got.


_________________
Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person. - Sara Luterman


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,536
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Apr 2017, 3:26 pm

Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump? I can never have reservations about voting for Trump considering who we saved the country from. What concerns me more is this undemocratic deep state refusing to cede power, I haven't trust the military or the 'intelligence' community since the illegal targeting of General Flynn. Mattis and McMaster's seem like neocons or at least huge hawks who are virulently anti-Russian, them a long with Ivanka/Jared Kushner seem like a problem as far as foreign policy goes. It's hard to speculate since this administration purposely doesn't want people to know what it is thinking, it seems like they are applying Nixon's 'madman theory' in the modern day. I don't trust Pence or a lot of the appointed Republican officials, someone like Nikki Haley is just a neocon running her mouth at the UN.

If Trump can get China on board with dealing with North Korea then I think that's a good thing and is indicative of his deal making ability. North Korea's nuclear program and growing instability are a threat to everyone in the reason not to mention the threat of proliferation. If North Korea actually acquired ICBM range nuclear weapons then I think they'll be demanding a bit more than a few more food rations.

Trump's foreign policy right now seems more theatrical than anything else, shooting cruise missiles at Assad and dropping the MOAB on ISIS in Afghanistan are about sending a message(to NK, to China, to Iran, to whoever) rather than achieving a military goal. We'll see where things go from here, I don't think anybody thought Trump was a pacifist and part of the 'peace thru strength' doctrine is demonstrating that strength and a willingness to use it when necessary. Things will have changed if they moved to eject Assad or partake in some major nation building effort.

I am hopeful that Trump's first face to face meeting with Putin is a good one and that they can work out some deals, I am sure the neocons don't even want them to be in the same room together but that's what needs to happen. All our allies stress the importance of working with Russia except the most anti-Russian states, our relationship shouldn't be determined by the tiny countries in between us which is the issue with NATO. Would you start WWIII over Estonia? I wouldn't.

We'll see where things go.


It must be remembered, those people you called Neocons, and trouble makers, were in fact installed into their positions by Trump himself. No one twisted his arm. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that Trump chose those people because he is in fact one of them.
Flynn was hardly a competent person. Rather, he was given to insane conspiracy theories, as was his kid. And remember, the only person who fired him was Trump, not some neocon or liberal cabal.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,931
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

22 Apr 2017, 4:01 pm

Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump?


Wasn't there a whole bunch of Reps who were up for it?



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,894
Location: temperate zone

22 Apr 2017, 6:33 pm

Biscuitman wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump?


Wasn't there a whole bunch of Reps who were up for it?


All of them, and Hillary, are part of a cabal of baby eating shapeshifting Reptoids from Arcturas who meet at Comet Pizza. Trump was the only Earthling on the ballot to choose from. So there you have it.



gingerpickles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2016
Age: 54
Posts: 504
Location: USA

22 Apr 2017, 6:56 pm

I always had reservations. However hawkishness is not something in my radar priorities.


He has 3 main promises to fulfill to make me feel he was a break even candidate.
Abolish Ocare (and replace ... he is after all a progressive who has long supported idea of universal healthcare)
Actively punish and remove ILlegals and hopefully rework streamline legal immigration to reward the ones who work hard to become one of us.
Tax reform as laid out in beginning.


And unofficial, DESTROY the Democratic and Republican party stranglehold to allow us to actual have candidates we find pleasing in elections, even if it means that a guy I might not like, might win with only a 1/4 of country behind him since there was 8 parties that election cycle

My real fear was that he would not stay conservative enough. His past was being chummy with progressives and Dems mostly.
Honestly there was not a sparkling constellation of choices. HBillary was no choice. Bernie, well at least well intended but i think would have been bulloxed as much as Trump has been along party lines ans establishment members. So ineffective to his voters and hated by the rest of us. Cruz would have been lukewarm choice.


_________________
FFFFF Captchas.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

22 Apr 2017, 8:36 pm

Biscuitman wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump?


Wasn't there a whole bunch of Reps who were up for it?


Would you rather Ted Cruz be president?



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

22 Apr 2017, 8:48 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump? I can never have reservations about voting for Trump considering who we saved the country from. What concerns me more is this undemocratic deep state refusing to cede power, I haven't trust the military or the 'intelligence' community since the illegal targeting of General Flynn. Mattis and McMaster's seem like neocons or at least huge hawks who are virulently anti-Russian, them a long with Ivanka/Jared Kushner seem like a problem as far as foreign policy goes. It's hard to speculate since this administration purposely doesn't want people to know what it is thinking, it seems like they are applying Nixon's 'madman theory' in the modern day. I don't trust Pence or a lot of the appointed Republican officials, someone like Nikki Haley is just a neocon running her mouth at the UN.

If Trump can get China on board with dealing with North Korea then I think that's a good thing and is indicative of his deal making ability. North Korea's nuclear program and growing instability are a threat to everyone in the reason not to mention the threat of proliferation. If North Korea actually acquired ICBM range nuclear weapons then I think they'll be demanding a bit more than a few more food rations.

Trump's foreign policy right now seems more theatrical than anything else, shooting cruise missiles at Assad and dropping the MOAB on ISIS in Afghanistan are about sending a message(to NK, to China, to Iran, to whoever) rather than achieving a military goal. We'll see where things go from here, I don't think anybody thought Trump was a pacifist and part of the 'peace thru strength' doctrine is demonstrating that strength and a willingness to use it when necessary. Things will have changed if they moved to eject Assad or partake in some major nation building effort.

I am hopeful that Trump's first face to face meeting with Putin is a good one and that they can work out some deals, I am sure the neocons don't even want them to be in the same room together but that's what needs to happen. All our allies stress the importance of working with Russia except the most anti-Russian states, our relationship shouldn't be determined by the tiny countries in between us which is the issue with NATO. Would you start WWIII over Estonia? I wouldn't.

We'll see where things go.


It must be remembered, those people you called Neocons, and trouble makers, were in fact installed into their positions by Trump himself. No one twisted his arm. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that Trump chose those people because he is in fact one of them.
Flynn was hardly a competent person. Rather, he was given to insane conspiracy theories, as was his kid. And remember, the only person who fired him was Trump, not some neocon or liberal cabal.


Flynn brought a different perspective and wasn't part of the foreign policy establishment, he got taken out by the deep state likely under the direct supervision of Obama or other high ranking Obama officials by illegally recording his conversations in a way that hasn't been made all the clear. Trump has allowed General Mattis promote his own people like McMasters, I don't trust these military guys who are too close to the deep state and MIC. General Flynn worked in the Obama administration as the head of the DNI btw, he's not even a Republican. The guy is a reformer, somebody who shakes things up and rattles the trees but unfortunately guys like that are not very popular in very hierarchical structures like the military or government administration. Calling him incompetent is ridiculous since his career is a testament to competency, I'd much rather he have the president's ear than his daughter or Son-in-Law.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,536
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Apr 2017, 9:29 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
What was the alternative to voting for Trump? I can never have reservations about voting for Trump considering who we saved the country from. What concerns me more is this undemocratic deep state refusing to cede power, I haven't trust the military or the 'intelligence' community since the illegal targeting of General Flynn. Mattis and McMaster's seem like neocons or at least huge hawks who are virulently anti-Russian, them a long with Ivanka/Jared Kushner seem like a problem as far as foreign policy goes. It's hard to speculate since this administration purposely doesn't want people to know what it is thinking, it seems like they are applying Nixon's 'madman theory' in the modern day. I don't trust Pence or a lot of the appointed Republican officials, someone like Nikki Haley is just a neocon running her mouth at the UN.

If Trump can get China on board with dealing with North Korea then I think that's a good thing and is indicative of his deal making ability. North Korea's nuclear program and growing instability are a threat to everyone in the reason not to mention the threat of proliferation. If North Korea actually acquired ICBM range nuclear weapons then I think they'll be demanding a bit more than a few more food rations.

Trump's foreign policy right now seems more theatrical than anything else, shooting cruise missiles at Assad and dropping the MOAB on ISIS in Afghanistan are about sending a message(to NK, to China, to Iran, to whoever) rather than achieving a military goal. We'll see where things go from here, I don't think anybody thought Trump was a pacifist and part of the 'peace thru strength' doctrine is demonstrating that strength and a willingness to use it when necessary. Things will have changed if they moved to eject Assad or partake in some major nation building effort.

I am hopeful that Trump's first face to face meeting with Putin is a good one and that they can work out some deals, I am sure the neocons don't even want them to be in the same room together but that's what needs to happen. All our allies stress the importance of working with Russia except the most anti-Russian states, our relationship shouldn't be determined by the tiny countries in between us which is the issue with NATO. Would you start WWIII over Estonia? I wouldn't.

We'll see where things go.


It must be remembered, those people you called Neocons, and trouble makers, were in fact installed into their positions by Trump himself. No one twisted his arm. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that Trump chose those people because he is in fact one of them.
Flynn was hardly a competent person. Rather, he was given to insane conspiracy theories, as was his kid. And remember, the only person who fired him was Trump, not some neocon or liberal cabal.


Flynn brought a different perspective and wasn't part of the foreign policy establishment, he got taken out by the deep state likely under the direct supervision of Obama or other high ranking Obama officials by illegally recording his conversations in a way that hasn't been made all the clear. Trump has allowed General Mattis promote his own people like McMasters, I don't trust these military guys who are too close to the deep state and MIC. General Flynn worked in the Obama administration as the head of the DNI btw, he's not even a Republican. The guy is a reformer, somebody who shakes things up and rattles the trees but unfortunately guys like that are not very popular in very hierarchical structures like the military or government administration. Calling him incompetent is ridiculous since his career is a testament to competency, I'd much rather he have the president's ear than his daughter or Son-in-Law.


Again, Flynn believed in baseless conspiracy theories, and used to come to conclusions that were devoid of evidence.
As for the Deep State - while intelligence agencies have committed illegal acts, and have overstepped any limits placed on them (which was especially so under Bush I), the Deep State has become the new bogeyman.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


BaronHarkonnen85
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2016
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 297
Location: Tennessee

22 Apr 2017, 9:39 pm

I wasn't happy with the Syrian air strikes, but he's still better than Clinton. It doesn't appear, hopefully, that he will get more involved at the moment.

Clinton, on the other hand, wanted a no-fly zone over Aleppo. The neocons and the internationalists are clamouring for the removal of Assad.

I don't want to remove Assad. I'm sick of nation building and foreign adventurism. There's no plan of what would happen is Assad is removed. It would be like Iraq 2.0. No thanks.

Plus, the MSM have been lying, saying Assad launched the chemical attacks when there still is no evidence that he did so.

The 2013 attack has also been blamed on Assad, but it is alleged that it was done by either the Turks or rebels.

Most of the sources the MSM uses are also sketchy. They are usually 'unnamed activists' or someone else who isn't on the ground.


_________________
--Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
The "Enlightenment" was the work of Satan


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

22 Apr 2017, 9:42 pm

Not that you care Bill since you're just team blue all the way regardless of what they actually believe in but if Bernie actually won, he would not of been allowed to do what he wanted the exact same way. There isn't a boogeyman about the deep state, we've known about CIA for a long time now being used for political ends and they've invented tons of other intelligence agencies since too so it's not a conspiracy theory or anything quite real. The deep state also killed Kennedy.

The "conspiracies" about the Clinton's are almost all true by the way, deal with it. They probably were behind the murder of Seth Rich too for being behind the DNC leaks as Wikileaks has all but confirmed was their source. Far more evidence of this than the ridiculous assertions peddled by the MSM against Trump who have invented this entire Russian angle.

I would rather have General Flynn than General McMaster, I think McMaster is closer to the Bush/Obama foreign policy establishment while Flynn had a fresh approach and really prioritized who our enemies are meaning ISIS not the Russians trying to kill ISIS.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,016
Location: Kansas

22 Apr 2017, 10:27 pm

Not yet.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,536
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 Apr 2017, 12:25 am

Jacoby wrote:
Not that you care Bill since you're just team blue all the way regardless of what they actually believe in but if Bernie actually won, he would not of been allowed to do what he wanted the exact same way. There isn't a boogeyman about the deep state, we've known about CIA for a long time now being used for political ends and they've invented tons of other intelligence agencies since too so it's not a conspiracy theory or anything quite real. The deep state also killed Kennedy.

The "conspiracies" about the Clinton's are almost all true by the way, deal with it. They probably were behind the murder of Seth Rich too for being behind the DNC leaks as Wikileaks has all but confirmed was their source. Far more evidence of this than the ridiculous assertions peddled by the MSM against Trump who have invented this entire Russian angle.

I would rather have General Flynn than General McMaster, I think McMaster is closer to the Bush/Obama foreign policy establishment while Flynn had a fresh approach and really prioritized who our enemies are meaning ISIS not the Russians trying to kill ISIS.


The CIA ran absolutely wild under Reagan and Bush I, especially their sales of crack in American inner cities to poor blacks, in order to finance the Contras.
It was the CIA that had tried to interfere with Bill Clinton's military action in Haiti, due to the agency's ties to Baby Doc. Doesn't sound like Clinton was all that friendly with the so called deep state.
If the so called deep state had been responsible for the Kennedy assassination, it was only indirectly so, as the people who had planned and carried out the conspiracy were contract employees and contacts active in the paramilitary Anti-Castro underground, rather than regular CIA, and were just as likely to have been associated with organized crime, and/or right wing anti-communist organizations. The CIA was more guilty as accessories after the fact, hiding their connections to the plotters behind the single shooter conclusion of the Warren Commision. At least that's the theory I find most plausible.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer