Trump Betrays Kurdish Allies
13 responses | 0 likes
Started by joj - Oct. 7, 2019, 11:20 a.m.


Wrong headed.

This is what General Mattis resigned over.

Not only have the Kurds been allies against ISIS in recent years but they shed blood taking out Saddam Hussein.

Even Fox News reported on it.  Who knew?

By metmike - Oct. 7, 2019, 11:58 a.m.
Like Reply

When did you suddenly change your position on this joj?

                Another Thing I like About Trump            

                          Started by joj - May 16, 2019, 7:23 a.m.            


"I could go on and on about all the things I dislike about Trump and the way he is ruining our country.

But today, I will mention something I REALLY like about him.  It is reported in the Washington Post today that he is resisting the march to war with Iran that Bolton and Pompeo are pushing for.  The report suggests he got angry with them for getting way ahead of the president on this.  Some minor attacks on Saudi oil vessels by allies of Iran in their proxy war in Yemen are being blamed on Iran by the White House hawks.  Trump, while blustery in his rhetoric, is showing restraint on the US habit of stupid foreign involvement.  

That is a good thing"


                The Thing I like most about Trump            

                            Started by joj - Sept. 18, 2019, 9:12 a.m.            


He has an aversion to war.  He is all bluster in many areas.  But his latest back down from the bluster of "locked and loaded" is "more sanctions" against Iran for the recent bombing of Saudi oil.  I prefer that much more than a military escalation.  


                Re: M.E. history lesson            

                           By joj - Sept. 11, 2019, 3:16 a.m.            

            Once in a while I agree with Zerohedge.

Zerohedge: In Syria, American meddling in the civil war, self-destructive support for various Islamists groups there and military intervention on behalf of the Kurds have broken Syria into a mostly jihadi, rebel-held northwest, Assad-regime center and U.S.-backed Kurdish east.

The point is that the U.S. has irreparably fractured a broad swath of the globe from West Africa to Central Asia. Interventionist pundits in both parties and countless think tanks insist that the U.S. military must remain in place across the region to police dangerous “ungoverned spaces,” yet recent history demonstrates irrefutably that it is the very intervention of Washington and presence of its troops that fragments once (relatively) stable nation-states and empowers separatists and Islamists.

The whole absurd mess boils down to a treacherous math problem of sorts.

By my simple accounting, a region from Nigeria to Afghanistan that once counted about 22 state entities has - since the onset of the U.S. “terror wars” - broken into some 37 autonomous, sometimes hardly governed, zones. According to the “experts,” that should mean total disaster and increased danger to the homeland. Yet it’s largely U.S. military policy and intervention itself that’s caused this fracture. So isn’t it high time to quit the American combat missions? Not according to the mainstream policymakers and pundits. For them, the war must (always) go on!

Counterproductivity seems the essence of U.S. military policy in Uncle Sam’s never-ending, post-9/11 wars. Call me crazy, or wildly conspiratorial, but after serving in two hopelessly absurd wars and studying the full scope of American military action, it seems that maybe that was the idea all along.

By joj - Oct. 7, 2019, 12:49 p.m.
Like Reply

No change at all.

There is a big difference between keeping a small force 1000-2000 for stability and marching into war with a 100,000+ troops.  

Risking instability with this rash move that is some kind of a personal deal with the dictator from Turkey.  

By metmike - Oct. 7, 2019, 2:05 p.m.
Like Reply

OK, thanks joj.

My personal opinion(for me) is that this would be just another example of foreign military intervention by our country, based on the all knowing gatekeepers of whats right in deciding where to apply the military intervention.....the chosen ones in the past,  our military industrial complex leaders.......who, if left to decide with impunity, get us into numerous conflicts that have all gone bad in the past.

                US to finally exit Afghanistan    

Let's face it. Bad stuff has always gone on there in many, many places, it still is and always will be.  We can get our brave soldiers killed,  kill their people, spent trillions of dollars and then have them hate us and end up accomplishing nothing or even making it worse in some situations in the past.

What makes this one so different(other than you or me or somebody else thinks THIS IS THE ONE and the other ones that failed  were not)

I'm with Rand Paul and what used to be the democrats position on this.

By joj - Oct. 7, 2019, 3:23 p.m.
Like Reply

“My great and unmatched wisdom”...

If Trump has not tweeted this I would not have believed it.  He is the exact opposite of everything he says.

By metmike - Oct. 7, 2019, 3:53 p.m.
Like Reply

I take what he says with the silly tweets and other dumb stuff with a grain of salt and look at what he does, then apply that to what it means to America and citizens in the country to extract value..........or lack of value.

Rand Paul Backs Trump on Syria: 'Fulfills His Promises'

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Monday backed President Donald Trump's withdrawal from Syria, saying on Twitter that the commander-in-chief "once again fulfills his promises to stop our endless wars."

"I stand with @realDonaldTrump today as he once again fulfills his promises to stop our endless wars and have a true America First foreign policy," Paul, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Homeland Security committees, tweeted.



Paul, 56, in his second term, has long called for the U.S. to withdraw from Syria and Afghanistan and has urged a softer approach in dealing with Iran.

But many Republicans slammed Trump for his Syrian decision, with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., calling it "short-sighted and irresponsible."

metmike: My position in the Middle East has lined up exactly with Trump for over a decade. In fact, it's one of the biggest reasons that I voted for Obama the democratic vs "we stay in Iraq until the job is done"-Mr. War Monger McCain.

Interestingly, Trumps Middle East actions line up much more with democrats historically and against his own republican party(much of who are against him on this) and but we know 

'Shocking': Trump Is Criticized For Pulling Troops From Syrian Border

"Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a frequent ally of Trump, also criticized the president, tweeting on Monday, "No matter what President Trump is saying about his decision, it is EXACTLY what President Obama did in Iraq with even more disastrous consequences for our national security."

metmike: And this is EXACTLY why I defended Obama and voted for him the first time that he ran!

Well, even though I disagree with the republicans here(as I have for my entire life) , they haven't changed their tune on Middle East agenda, just because its Trump making the decision.

Regarding the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, it was greatly supported by democrats and republicans were strongly against it.

A slight majority of Americans were for it, mostly democrats.

Times have changes(presidents actually).

By joj - Oct. 7, 2019, 9 p.m.
Like Reply

"I take what he says with the silly tweets and other dumb stuff with a grain of salt and look at what he does"

Is that what you call his tweets?  "silly"  "dumb".... Quite generous of you.

What he had done is indeed far worse than his lying tweets or his divide the country tweets.

He has depressed the moral of the intelligence agencies.

He has fanned the flames of racism.

He has destroyed our alliances with democratic allies (hurting our chances in China negotiations) and cozied up to dictators (inexplicably).

He has abdicated American dominance in trade with Asia by leaving TPP (even though I'd bet half of everything I own he never read a word of the treaty) and ceding power to China.

He undermines our freedom of the press.

He leaves the fledgling democracy of Ukraine hanging in the lurch to further his own greedy self interests (America 2nd - Trump 1st).

He degrades environmental standards, even when the auto industry contradicts him.

He has degraded the office of the presidency by consistently acting with corrupt instincts, as he has his entire life before being elected.

I'm sure I've forgotten a dozen or so other items.  I'd do a search but we've never agreed on ANY acceptable news sources that criticize Trump including Barrons or the WSJ.

But good idea Mike.  Better to judge him on his horrible actions rather than his mean spirited, angry, lying tweets.

By metmike - Oct. 7, 2019, 10:48 p.m.
Like Reply

Does this mean you won’t be voting for him in 2020?

By mcfarm - Oct. 7, 2019, 10:51 p.m.
Like Reply

right joj, far better to follow the lead of out once great intelligence services and all those genius congressmen and get in another 18 year war....trump campaigned on staying out and he was not lying apparently. He now has the middle eastern crazies looking at each other for a change

By GunterK - Oct. 8, 2019, 12:33 a.m.
Like Reply

 pulling troops out of Syria and Afghanistan??? terrible, terrible!!

However.... everybody relax now... we can fix it... we just have to stick together...

This is what needs to be done...

Step 1:

accept the fact that Trump was elected into the WH, because he promised a) the Wall, b) jobs coming back to the US, and c) pulling the US out of never-ending, unwinnable wars. A large portion of the People are tired of sending their sons to places like Afghanistan, Syria, etc.

Step 2:

keep throwing dirt on Trump. If I am not mistaken,Saul Alinsky, in his book "Rules for Radicals" says that one should blame the opponent for the same bad things you are doing yourself. This rule from his "playbook" is now being applied. Biden clearly needs to be investigated for getting his son a juicy job in the Ukraine (not to mention that trip to China).  And now we find out that Pelosi's son also has some dealings in the Ukraine. But, instead of investigating her or Biden, we are accusing Trump for asking for an investigation.. Good job.

Step 3:

Hillary wants to run again, I read. With enough dirt being thrown on Trump, we should be able to get her to win this time. 

Step 4: Once elected, we only have to wait to fulfill one of her 2016 promises: She would not hesitate to make a preemptive nuclear strike . She would probably strike several of the unpopular places, such as Iran, Syria, and others....maybe even Moscow.

Step 5:

All we have to do after that is to wait for the radioactive dust to settle down, and enjoy our lives... a life without borders, welfare for everyone,

By TimNew - Oct. 8, 2019, 3:31 a.m.
Like Reply

Yes.  It appears many dems are willing to support anything, no matter what, as long as it is not Trump. They'll accept anything, regardless of a lack of evidence, as long as it looks bad for Trump.  And they'll reject anything, no matter what, regardless of evidence, if it looks bad for one of his opponents.

I've seen them look at direct quotes, and still take the false narrative of the press/leftist politicians while rejecting what their lying eyes and ears tell them, abandoning any semblence of critical thinking.

They are indeed a very well trained flock.

By joj - Oct. 8, 2019, 6:17 a.m.
Like Reply

"Does this mean you won’t be voting for him in 2020?"

I actually think having no president would be a better outcome than having Trump as president.  

So let me put it this way:  I'd be inclined to vote for a sock puppet before I'd vote for Donald Trump.

By TimNew - Oct. 8, 2019, 6:54 a.m.
Like Reply

I'd be inclined to vote for a sock puppet before I'd vote for Donald Trump.

So, essentially,  you are saying..  any of the dem presidential candidates..   Tho in some cases,  I think you are insulting sock puppets.

By cliff-e - Oct. 8, 2019, 9:13 a.m.
Like Reply

Trump Towers in's always about business. Right?