North Korea and US politics

[slotplayer]

The House of Zod is Falling Baby!

 

[goatwack]

Couldn't quite believe what I was witnessing earlier today on Sky News, as Trump basically excused the actions of Anne Sacoolas, a diplomat's wife who ran over 19- year old Harry Dunn because she was driving on the wrong side of the road.

She has since slunk off to the U.S under diplomatic immunity. Kind of a big deal right here right now, but we all know what will inevitably (not) happen

 

[Harry_BKK]

Couldn't quite believe what I was witnessing earlier today on Sky News, as Trump basically excused the actions of Anne Sacoolas, a diplomat's wife who ran over 19- year old Harry Dunn because she was driving on the wrong side of the road.

She has since slunk off to the U.S under diplomatic immunity. Kind of a big deal right here right now, but we all know what will inevitably (not) happen

View attachment 115227

The usual garbled talk that is at the level of less than a 5th-grader. No coherent sentence whatsoever. Ducking and swerving around instead of giving a clear answer.

If find the "immunity" thing for diplomats is rather a slap in the face for us normal mortals. Especially because it extends to family members of the ambassador/etc.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Couldn't quite believe what I was witnessing earlier today on Sky News, as Trump basically excused the actions of Anne Sacoolas, a diplomat's wife who ran over 19- year old Harry Dunn because she was driving on the wrong side of the road.

She has since slunk off to the U.S under diplomatic immunity. Kind of a big deal right here right now, but we all know what will inevitably (not) happen

View attachment 115227

There was a similar case here in Singapore and Romania actually arrested the guy and sent him back to Singapore for the trial. So, it can be done.

 

[goatwack]

There was a similar case here in Singapore and Romania actually arrested the guy and sent him back to Singapore for the trial. So, it can be done.

Oh for sure, it's not 'un-doable'

Just the fact that Trump is blatantly partisan, doesn't acknowledge the severity of her deeds, won't exactly extradite her, she won't turn herself in & she has the moral compass of a balloon

 

[mack341]

from the sun:

"Jonathan Saccolas is a US diplomat and alleged NSA spy.

Anne was able to claim diplomatic immunity after a special deal was put in place between the UK and the US which gives staff and their families based at RAF Croughton diplomatic immunity.
Usually, diplomatic immunity only covers those diplomats and their dependants based in London.
The special arrangement has been in place as early as 1994 for this particular base"


Funny how the uk is bending over backwards to extradite Assange for mainly being a conduit for whistleblowing...double standards, the hallmark of all corrupt systems and countries.

 

[Steviedoo]

How many isis supporters have escaped...

Mr tough on terror...

If Obama had done this they would have impeached him so fast.


Trump created a mess and now mr hero will go ahead and impose sanctions ...it’s laughable...

 

[Harry_BKK]

How many isis supporters have escaped...

Mr tough on terror...

If Obama had done this they would have impeached him so fast.


Trump created a mess and now mr hero will go ahead and impose sanctions ...it’s laughable...

Same old con trick from Mr T. ..... Create a crisis to appear as the saviour of the world.

Just imagine what Mnuchin said (ordered by Mr T): "We can shut down Turkey's economy if we need to." That's what they tell a NATO member! They first let Turkey attack and slaughter the Kurds and after the damage is done, they want to impose sanctions. That is some logic!

Who wants to be an ally of the US when you listen to statements like that?

It was also interesting to see how Mr T presented himself as the saviour after agreeing to a "part deal" with the Chinese. It is now, of course, the "greatest and biggest deal ever". However, that is exactly where they were in March / April 2019. It's not even on paper yet, then both countries have to sign it and Congress has to ratify it. They signed NAFTA2 one year ago and it is still not ratified by the US or Canada.

From what I read the pre-agreement is pretty much the "small steps" approach the Chinese have been doing the last few decades since they were allowed to join the WTO. Something anyone else would have been able to achieve, but without the upheaval from Mr T tariff gambit. Funny is also that Mnuchin, Lightizer and Mr T only mentioned what the Chinese "agreed" to but not a single word what the US has offered other than to put the last 5% raise tariffs on hold.

Looks to me like Mr T agreed to something, anything just so he can present some sort of "win". He's terribly desperate for one after being rebuked by seven or eight court decisions last week alone.

 

[Harry_BKK]

This just made me laugh this morning.

Mr T a few days ago: "I don't know the gentlemen (Parnas and Fruman), you have to ask Rudy."

For somebody who claims to have the best brain and memory, he sure forgets a lot of things, preferably exactly then when it is some negative for him.

A pic of him and Parnas from 2014, FB can be a real treasure trove sometimes.

Parnas said he sold Mr T condos when Fred (Mr T's father) was still in charge. The poster of the FB post says he deals in gold, oil and diamonds. Put the two together and you've got the poster-perfect case for money laundering. And Mr T looks like he was/is not just a side note. These people had dinner at the White House with him (I wonder if Mr T served again burgers and fries?! ). Which "normal" person gets that privilege?

 

[Harry_BKK]

How many isis supporters have escaped...

Mr tough on terror...

If Obama had done this they would have impeached him so fast.


Trump created a mess and now mr hero will go ahead and impose sanctions ...it’s laughable...

Found this very fitting comment on another forum:

"Mr T pulled 1,000 troops from Syria to end these "endless wars", then sent 2,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, in case there is war."

I am sure Mr T will explain it with the "alternative fact" that Saudi Arabia helped the US in WWII and stormed the beaches of Normandy side by side with US soldiers.

 

[pinnit2014]

Found this very fitting comment on another forum:

"Mr T pulled 1,000 troops from Syria to end these "endless wars", then sent 2,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, in case there is war."

I am sure Mr T will explain it with the "alternative fact" that Saudi Arabia helped the US in WWII and stormed the beaches of Normandy side by side with US soldiers.

Maybe he’s read The Man in the High Castle once too often? ;-)

 

[Steviedoo]

Found this very fitting comment on another forum:

"Mr T pulled 1,000 troops from Syria to end these "endless wars", then sent 2,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, in case there is war."

I am sure Mr T will explain it with the "alternative fact" that Saudi Arabia helped the US in WWII and stormed the beaches of Normandy side by side with US soldiers.

I just don’t get how the trump supporters can still find a way to justify his actions and his lies

 

[Harry_BKK]

US soldiers now becoming mercenaries. Mr T renting out the US army to the country from where most 9/11 perpetrators were coming from.

Pay us and we will do the killing for you! So next time MBS wants to get rid of a journalist/dissident he will just order some Green Berets to do the dirty work.

Now he's not only selling the country to the highest bidder and openly betraying allies, he's selling/renting the military to anyone willing to cough up a few Benjamins! Pretty sure Mr T thinks that it will make the US great again, the question is only in which respect. In this case, killing for cash!

The best deal maker ever!

Aaah bless, @slotplayer will be proud!

EDIT: Makes me wonder to what price Mr T agreed with the Saudis that they will pay for a fallen soldier?

 

[mack341]

US soldiers now becoming mercenaries. Mr T renting out the US army to the country from where most 9/11 perpetrators were coming from.

Pay us and we will do the killing for you! So next time MBS wants to get rid of a journalist/dissident he will just order some Green Berets to do the dirty work.

Now he's not only selling the country to the highest bidder and openly betraying allies, he's selling/renting the military to anyone willing to cough up a few Benjamins! Pretty sure Mr T thinks that it will make the US great again, the question is only in which respect. In this case, killing for cash!

The best deal maker ever! View attachment 115327 Aaah bless, @slotplayer will be proud!

EDIT: Makes me wonder to what price Mr T agreed with the Saudis that they will pay for a fallen soldier?

I thought this recent deployment was 'purely defensive', providing air defence capability. If so, I don't see a problem with the saudis covering the additional cost rather than the us tax payer.

I still wander whether the germans (in general) in 2019 still want the us and british army stationed in their country (since 1945) as a deterrent to russian invasion? If so, again there are costs to uk/us taxpayers providing this 'defence'

edit: just read the bases in germany are for the whole of europe, so not necessarily about preventing a russian invasion, I think that was the original intention though to protect west germany.

interestingly the german army atm has 182,000 active personnel (with 62,000 soldiers) and costs about 47 billion euros to maintain, so not cheap, the uk's is around £37 billion with 78,000 soldiers, so I'm guessing not paid as much as their german counterparts?

 

[Kroffe]

I thought this recent deployment was 'purely defensive', providing air defence capability. If so, I don't see a problem with the saudis covering the additional cost rather than the us tax payer.

I still wander whether the germans (in general) in 2019 still want the us and british army stationed in their country (since 1945) as a deterrent to russian invasion? If so, again there are costs to uk/us taxpayers providing this 'defence'

edit: just read the bases in germany are for the whole of europe, so not necessarily about preventing a russian invasion, I think that was the original intention though to protect west germany.

interestingly the german army atm has 182,000 active personnel (with 62,000 soldiers) and costs about 47 billion euros to maintain, so not cheap, the uk's is around £37 billion

I thought you had left this wasteland of a thread and were on a break?

Welcome back to the circus!

 

[Harry_BKK]

I thought this recent deployment was 'purely defensive', providing air defence capability. If so, I don't see a problem with the saudis covering the additional cost rather than the us tax payer.

I still wander whether the germans (in general) in 2019 still want the us and british army stationed in their country (since 1945) as a deterrent to russian invasion? If so, again there are costs to uk/us taxpayers providing this 'defence'

edit: just read the bases in germany are for the whole of europe, so not necessarily about preventing a russian invasion, I think that was the original intention though to protect west germany.

interestingly the german army atm has 182,000 active personnel (with 62,000 soldiers) and costs about 47 billion euros to maintain, so not cheap, the uk's is around £37 billion

Sure, "purely defensive" AKA fighter squadrons.

And about the UK soldiers, please read the history yourselves because I am getting tired of repeating myself.

But just as a short note, the main purpose of all US and UK soldiers stationed in Germany was not to defend Germany! Plus, Germany carried most of the cost.

At present, you have less than 3,000 troops in Germany which will be reduced to virtually zero by 2020.

 

[mack341]

I thought you had left this wasteland of a thread and were on a break?

View attachment 115328

Welcome back to the circus!

break time's over! I like harry to have somebody to debate, seems like the previous trump thread did a lot of people 'in' and they evacuated ....but I will have to be a part time debater from now on myself

 

[mack341]

Sure, "purely defensive" AKA fighter squadrons.

View attachment 115329

And about the UK soldiers, please read the history yourselves because I am getting tired of repeating myself.

But just as a short note, the main purpose of all US and UK soldiers stationed in Germany was not to defend Germany! Plus, Germany carried most of the cost.

At present, you have less than 3,000 troops in Germany which will be reduced to virtually zero by 2020.

I believe fighter planes (interceptors?) can be defensive, the list above does sound broadly defensive to me.

edit: you didn't answer the question re germany, whether germans wanted us and uk troops to remain stationed there? Apparently the local businesses near the bases like the extra custom etc..it helps the economy.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I believe fighter planes (interceptors?) can be defensive, the list above does sound broadly defensive to me.

edit: you didn't answer the question re germany, whether germans wanted us and uk troops to remain stationed there? Apparently the local businesses near the bases like the extra custom etc..it helps the economy.

The general population, me included, would prefer for all foreign soldiers to leave Germany.

IIRC, I pointed it out once already. The contributions of all US installations/bases in Germany is appr. 0.01% of the GDP. The UK part is probably 0.0001% by now. So no, economically it does not make sense either.

Plus, Germany is spending billions in cleaning up the mess your and the US troops leave behind, e.g. contaminated soil, munition remnants, old houses which still have asbestos etc. Shall we send you the invoice for that?

The absolute majority of places where troops have left flourished in the following years. So that point is moot too.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I believe fighter planes (interceptors?) can be defensive, the list above does sound broadly defensive to me.

edit: you didn't answer the question re germany, whether germans wanted us and uk troops to remain stationed there? Apparently the local businesses near the bases like the extra custom etc..it helps the economy.

Here a comparison of before and after the US soldiers left. Most of the housing had to be taken down completely because the US used a lot of asbestos-ridden stuff when they had them built and never bothered removing it. Where possible, houses were renovated/cleaned of asbestos for a lot of money.

I know it because my brother bought a flat in the area.

 

[mack341]

Harry not seeking to argue for the point of it, but you said "Plus, Germany carried most of the cost. " so how is that different to this development with saudi arabia? how come the mercenaries charge doesn't stand before?

After the iraq war many us corporations supposedly made a fortune from the rebuilding projects, so it could be said there's always been a 'kickback' if you look closely enough.

BTW I'm not in favour of the US helping the saudis out, a country that beheads people in the street under blasphemy laws

from wikipedia:

"To secure convictions, Saudi Arabia's administrative and judicial authorities routinely seek confessions. To secure confessions, the authorities commonly engage in severe violations of human rights. Persons accused of blasphemy may be subjected to torture or to cruel and degrading treatment as well as to prolonged and solitary detention.

also

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

"On Monday, a horrific mass execution was carried out by the savage regime involving 37 men being killed including one being crucified and another having his head impaled on a spike. Those killed during the beheading bloodbath had all been convicted of "terrorism offences" in the hardline kingdom. However, one of those beheaded. Abdulkareem al-Hawaj, was arrested while attending an anti-government protest when he was aged just 16. He was convicted of being a "terrorist" in a trial branded a "farce" by Amnesty International."

While they insist trials are conducted to the strictest standards of fairness, evidence has emerged from the country to suggest the opposite. Trials are reported to have lasted a day and confessions extracted under torture. The country has no written penal code and no code of criminal procedure and judicial procedure. That allows courts wide powers to determine what constitutes a criminal offence and what sentences crimes deserve. The only means of appeal is directly to the King, who decides whether the condemned lives or dies. The list of punishments makes for grim reading.

Beheading remains the most common form of execution and the sentence traditionally carried out in a public square on a Friday after prayers.
Deera Square in the centre of the capital Riyadh is known locally as "Chop Chop Square”.

This question should be put to trump and every president before, congressmen and senators etc...how can you ally to such a barbaric country?

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry not seeking to argue for the point of it, but you said "Plus, Germany carried most of the cost. " so how is that different to this development with saudi arabia? how come the mercenaries charge doesn't stand before?

After the iraq war many us corporations supposedly made a fortune from the rebuilding projects, so it could be said there's always been a 'kickback' if you look closely enough.

BTW I'm not in favour of the US helping the saudis out, a country that beheads people in the street under blasphemy laws

from wikipedia:

"To secure convictions, Saudi Arabia's administrative and judicial authorities routinely seek confessions. To secure confessions, the authorities commonly engage in severe violations of human rights. Persons accused of blasphemy may be subjected to torture or to cruel and degrading treatment as well as to prolonged and solitary detention.

also

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

"On Monday, a horrific mass execution was carried out by the savage regime involving 37 men being killed including one being crucified and another having his head impaled on a spike. Those killed during the beheading bloodbath had all been convicted of "terrorism offences" in the hardline kingdom. However, one of those beheaded. Abdulkareem al-Hawaj, was arrested while attending an anti-government protest when he was aged just 16. He was convicted of being a "terrorist" in a trial branded a "farce" by Amnesty International."

While they insist trials are conducted to the strictest standards of fairness, evidence has emerged from the country to suggest the opposite. Trials are reported to have lasted a day and confessions extracted under torture. The country has no written penal code and no code of criminal procedure and judicial procedure. That allows courts wide powers to determine what constitutes a criminal offence and what sentences crimes deserve. The only means of appeal is directly to the King, who decides whether the condemned lives or dies. The list of punishments makes for grim reading.

Beheading remains the most common form of execution and the sentence traditionally carried out in a public square on a Friday after prayers.
Deera Square in the centre of the capital Riyadh is known locally as "Chop Chop Square”.

This question should be put to trump and every president before, congressmen and senators etc...how can you ally to such a barbaric country?

Again mate, the troops were not there to protect Germany but to function as a first defence line against Russia, emphasis on first, to protect France and the UK.

Germany did not pay out of their own will, they were not given the choice. Plus, they never asked for troops to be stationed in Germany. I'm too lazy now to look for the documents/treaties again.

As for Saudi Arabia, I've been a couple of times to Jeddah and Riyadh as I was sent by my employer, and vowed to never return. Made sure that they sent me to Iran twice within two months after that, each time I entered on purpose with a different passport, so I would have Iranian stamps in both and could then not enter Saudi-Arabia or the UAE again. Didn't tell my employer that I had at the time three passports though, they knew all along that I had two and I left them in that belief.

 

[mack341]

just to add I haven't watched that trump clip above, but if his logic is, the deal makes more sense or is better for the us citizen just because he extracted a few dollars out of the saudis, then I strongly disagree with him.

If it's being done to protect very important oil supply for the world, then I could see it making sense, and the saudis should stump up for the cost. That's all really, the only reasoning that is justified.

All this 'I got a tremendous deal' is a bit pathetic, like it's gonna make much difference to anything, trying to receive plaudits for basic stuff and acting as if that is all the justification required for a questionable partnership with KSA, is demeaning and desperate.

Edit: it's hard to argue against trump re the costs, it would look silly for a senator or congressman to stand up and say 'we should give this help to KSA for free' when it's a very rich country and the US has 20 trillion debt. It is complicated, US foreign policy and the bases and deployment all around the globe, and with such high national debt, at some point I would've thought there will have to be a change.

 

[Harry_BKK]

just to add I haven't watched that trump clip above, but if his logic is, the deal makes more sense or is better for the us citizen just because he extracted a few dollars out of the saudis, then I strongly disagree with him.

If it's being done to protect very important oil supply for the world, then I could see it making sense, and the saudis should stump up for the cost. That's all really, the only reasoning that is justified.

All this 'I got a tremendous deal' is a bit pathetic, like it's gonna make much difference to anything, trying to receive plaudits for basic stuff and acting as if that is all the justification required for a questionable partnership with KSA, is demeaning and desperate.

Edit: it's hard to argue against trump re the costs, it would look silly for a senator or congressman to stand up and say 'we should give this help to KSA for free' when it's a very rich country and the US has 20 trillion debt. It is complicated, US foreign policy and the bases and deployment all around the globe, and with such high national debt, at some point I would've thought there will have to be a change.

Mack, do a search. The US has about 40 bases all around Iran, including some 12,000 men in Qatar and aircraft carriers in the region.

SA bought billions worth of weaponry (IIRC, they were the biggest importer of weaponry worldwide in 2018) from the US and surely can defend themselves against anyone in the region.

Militarily, there was no need whatsoever for the extra deployment but he agreed to it just to first, show his base what kind of great deal maker he is (he is not) and second, intimidate his nemesis Iran a little more (they are not).

IIRC, Saudi Arabia is responsible for appr. 10% of the world oil supply, so not really that important. Iran could fill that void in a jiffy!

 

[Harry_BKK]

just to add I haven't watched that trump clip above, but if his logic is, the deal makes more sense or is better for the us citizen just because he extracted a few dollars out of the saudis, then I strongly disagree with him.

If it's being done to protect very important oil supply for the world, then I could see it making sense, and the saudis should stump up for the cost. That's all really, the only reasoning that is justified.

All this 'I got a tremendous deal' is a bit pathetic, like it's gonna make much difference to anything, trying to receive plaudits for basic stuff and acting as if that is all the justification required for a questionable partnership with KSA, is demeaning and desperate.

Edit: it's hard to argue against trump re the costs, it would look silly for a senator or congressman to stand up and say 'we should give this help to KSA for free' when it's a very rich country and the US has 20 trillion debt. It is complicated, US foreign policy and the bases and deployment all around the globe, and with such high national debt, at some point I would've thought there will have to be a change.

BTW, we are forgetting one part of the equation in all of this.

Saud-Arabia rescued Mr T a couple of times from bankruptcy in the 1990s or thereabouts. Sounds to me like he still owes them!

 

[Harry_BKK]

This is the language of Mr T who claims he has only the best words. Did I say 5th-grader in the past? I have to take that back as it would be an insult to the 5th graders. This sounds more like "kindergarten" language.

 

[mack341]

This is the language of Mr T who claims he has only the best words. Did I say 5th-grader in the past? I have to take that back as it would be an insult to the 5th grader. This sounds more like "kindergarten" language.



View attachment 115415

At least it's clear and easy to understand, the threats are a little bit silly worded like that, but I guess this is more for the US public's consumption than a highly secret official letter as communications between foreign leaders tend to be ?

Going to be interesting what or how russia approaches this, as apparently some of their forces are now in that region; the alternative for the usa and trump was probably a declaration of war against turkey, that was never going to happen in reality, so sanctions are the next sensible option.

 

[Harry_BKK]

At least it's clear and easy to understand, the threats are a little bit silly worded like that, but I guess this is more for the US public's consumption than a highly secret official letter as communications between foreign leaders tend to be ?

Going to be interesting what or how russia approaches this, as apparently some of their forces are now in that region; the alternative for the usa and trump was probably a declaration of war against turkey, that was never going to happen in reality, so sanctions are the next sensible option.

Defending your idol Mr T to the last breath?

This is the communication level of a US president!! It shows the real education and IQ level of Mr T!

And no, there would be no declaration of war needed against Turkey not even talking about it, because the Turks knew they couldn't launch the invasion as long as the US had its soldiers in the area. They prepared it nicely before the two spoke on the phone, Mr T then pulled the few troops back and within a few hours, the Turkish started their offensive.

Again, are you that blinded by Mr T?

Mr T saw this as an opportunity to deflect from his more pressing domestic issues. That's all. There is no grand wizardry or genius thinking behind it, it is simply for his own interests.

 

[mack341]

Defending your idol Mr T to the last breath?

This is the communication level of a US president!! It shows the real education and IQ level of Mr T!

And no, there would be no declaration of war needed against Turkey not even talking about it, because the Turks knew they couldn't launch the invasion as long as the US had its soldiers in the area. They prepared it nicely before the two spoke on the phone, Mr T then pulled the few troops back and within a few hours, the Turkish started their offensive.

Again, are you that blinded by Mr T?

Mr T saw this as an opportunity to deflect from his more pressing domestic issues. That's all. There is no grand wizardry or genius thinking behind it, it is simply for his own interests.

Harry that idol bit gave me a chuckle, I don't think I idolise any politician that I can think of, not even old Don. What if the syrian free army which is kind of a turkish backed militia approached and attacked the kurdish positions, bit like skirmishers, the us troops are in the line of fire. It would be a bit like the un troops who have to standby and can't get involved.

Things escalate quickly, and this whole issue manbij etc..came up at least a year or two ago, so the kurds have had plenty of time to deal with the reality, which is the US cannot garrison troops alongside them for evermore in order to secure a homeland on someone else's land bordering turkey [syria]. Yes the hawks in washington would sanction this but they don't give a **** about having a sensible foreign policy or the costs involved.

 

[goatwack]

Don't be a tough guy

Don't be a fool!

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry that idol bit gave me a chuckle, I don't think I idolise any politician that I can think of, not even old Don. What if the syrian free army which is kind of a turkish backed militia approached and attacked the kurdish positions, bit like skirmishers, the us troops are in the line of fire. It would be a bit like the un troops who have to standby and can't get involved.

Things escalate quickly, and this whole issue manbij etc..came up at least a year or two ago, so the kurds have had plenty of time to deal with the reality, which is the US cannot garrison troops alongside them for evermore in order to secure a homeland on someone else's land bordering turkey [syria]. Yes the hawks in washington would sanction this but they don't give a **** about having a sensible foreign policy or the costs involved.

Look Mack....just a few weeks or maybe months ago the US (I assume on order from Mr T) asked the Kurds to take down their defence positions in the area to convince Erdogan that they do not plan anything. The US stayed in some strategic positions with a few dozen soldiers, knowing it would be enough of a deterrent for Erdogan.

All the while, Erdogan built up military at the border.

Now, the Kurds had taken down their defence, Mr "Unmatched Wisdom" talks to Erdogan, who dreams of restoring the Turkish borders to those prior to WWI, and not only agrees to remove the US soldiers from those strategic positions but also to not actively defend the Kurds.

Fact is, the US is mainly responsible for the situation. Without their wars in Iraq there would not have been ISIS, or at least would have not grown to the size they were. The Kurds did all the hard work defeating them. Then the US pulls out on a whim. That is a clear betrayal of allies.

The US should have stayed until the region is completely stabilized and until they sorted the problem with the 10K ISIS prisoners/detainees. Anything else is just a repeat of Vietnam or Korea. Well, actually we shouldn't be surprised at all because the US has always shafted allies, so basically nothing new.

EDIT: And it's not like Mr T is bringing those troops home, he's not ending any war whatsoever.... just compare the number of US troops in the Middle East in Oct 2016 and now in Oct 2019. The information is publicly available. Those numbers contradicts anything he says about bringing troops home and ending wars. Find them and tell me then if Mr T is the "peace-loving president with unmatched wisdom" you seem to be so convinced that he is.

And please spare me another "hawks in Washington" excuse. Mr T is using the authorizations from 2001 and 2003 to justify his actions.

Funny that he never bragged about the troops when he silently increased them! But he does the soon he removes a few dozen from a vital strategic area.

 

[Kroffe]

This is the language of Mr T who claims he has only the best words. Did I say 5th-grader in the past? I have to take that back as it would be an insult to the 5th graders. This sounds more like "kindergarten" language.



View attachment 115415

You can tell that its real because he has signed it with one of his crayons.

Anyway, ill call you later.

 

[mack341]

The US should have stayed until the region is completely stabilized and until they sorted the problem with the 10K ISIS prisoners/detainees.

I agree but how long is that going to take.... I'm just wondering now whether erdogan has seen an opportunity with trump's impeachment problems, to push forward. This military operation has been on the cards for over a year though, the turks attacked kurds in afrin a while back and the US didn't react then. If the turkish airforce is attacking kurdish positions in NE syria, what's the us supposed to do, launch fighter jets from their turkish airbase?

And If the turks are prepared to damage their economy over this and long term relations with the US/EU [and face boycotts on brands like beko, damage to tourism etc..] then it must be a major issue for them not having this kurdish state form on their border.

I think there will be negotiations now the US withdrawal has weakened the kurds hand massively, it may be that before the kurds weren't willing to make all the concessions turkey required due to having us troops stationed nearby.

The turks may want the land for themselves, or perhaps for it to go back under syria's control, even though they despise assad and helped to try and get him removed, they certainly don't want to be in a worse situation [in their eyes] than before the syrian civil war started, with a newly formed kurdish state on their border.

The european nations and other members of nato could send troops to NE syria to protect the kurds, but I don't see much mention of this happening, it would be the equivalent of making your troops perform the role of a human shield, once the turks showed intent to attack kurdish positions/camps.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I agree but how long is that going to take.... I'm just wondering now whether erdogan has seen an opportunity with trump's impeachment problems, to push forward. This military operation has been on the cards for over a year though, the turks attacked kurds in afrin a while back and the US didn't react then. If the turkish airforce is attacking kurdish positions in NE syria, what's the us supposed to do, launch fighter jets from their turkish airbase?

And If the turks are prepared to damage their economy over this and long term relations with the US/EU [and face boycotts on brands like beko, damage to tourism etc..] then it must be a major issue for them not having this kurdish state form on their border.

I think there will be negotiations now the US withdrawal has weakened the kurds hand massively, it may be that before the kurds weren't willing to make all the concessions turkey required due to having us troops stationed nearby.

The turks may want the land for themselves, or perhaps for it to go back under syria's control, even though they despise assad and helped to try and get him removed, they certainly don't want to be in a worse situation [in their eyes] than before the syrian civil war started, with a newly formed kurdish state on their border.

The european nations and other members of nato could send troops to NE syria to protect the kurds, but I don't see much mention of this happening, it would be the equivalent of making your troops perform the role of a human shield, once the turks showed intent to attack kurdish positions/camps.

IIRC, there are no US fighter jets or bombers stationed at Incirlik. Most are in Jordan and Qatar.

Erdogan had the plans for probably a decade. He's been waiting for an opportune moment. And Mr T handed it to him on a silver platter.

Turkey is a NATO partner, so for the European nations to protect the Kurds against the Turks as in actively fighting them, they would have to first throw Turkey out of NATO. Which is no easy process, well, it has never been done before.

Erdogan knew very well that he could not make his move as long as US soldiers are guarding the area. Mr T needed something to show and brag about. 1 + 1 = 2 and the region is again in turmoil.

And the main reason is yet again the US.

 

[mack341]

IIRC, there are no US fighter jets or bombers stationed at Incirlik. Most are in Jordan and Qatar.

Erdogan had the plans for probably a decade. He's been waiting for an opportune moment. And Mr T handed it to him on a silver platter.

Turkey is a NATO partner, so for the European nations to protect the Kurds against the Turks as in actively fighting them, they would have to first throw Turkey out of NATO. Which is no easy process, well, it has never been done before.

Erdogan knew very well that he could not make his move as long as US soldiers are guarding the area. Mr T needed something to show and brag about. 1 + 1 = 2 and the region is again in turmoil.

And the main reason is yet again the US.

You really feel trump benefits from this politically?

On a side point I do sense the impeachment push seems to be losing impetus.

 

[goatwack]

But it was such a good letter

Link Removed (Old/Invalid)

 

[Harry_BKK]

The show is getting funnier.

At the moment we are seeing the usual tactic. Try to stay ahead of the news.

For weeks Mr T and his sycophants: "No quid pro quo"

Mulvaney now saying. "Yes, there was a quid pro quo but that's OK as we to it all the time!"

 

[mack341]

The show is getting funnier.

At the moment we are seeing the usual tactic. Try to stay ahead of the news.

For weeks Mr T and his sycophants: "No quid pro quo"

Mulvaney now saying. "Yes, there was a quid pro quo but that's OK as we to it all the time!"

Harry I can't find this quote ?

 

[goatwack]

Harry I can't find this quote ?

Shhh

We only deal in alternative facts here

 

[Kroffe]

Harry I can't find this quote ?

Try searching for it without the Harry-eyes at the end.
I think that is something that Harry added.

 

[goatwack]

Ah. Now I know why Google didn't recognize

"Yes, there was a quid pro quo but that's OK as we to it all the time!"

 

[paul7388]

Harry I can't find this quote ?

Harry I can't find this quote ?

Quick search found it on this twitter

 

[mack341]

It wouldn't surprise me if Mr Mulvaney wasn't going to be on the receiving end of an apprentice style 'you're fired!' blast soon.

Lou Dobbs was actually questioning his [mulvaney's] performance a few months back and donald listens to dobbs; will be interesting to see if this qualified 'admission' is covered by fox news tonight, it'll be dobbs who picks up on it if anyone does.

I have always thought variations of 'quid pro quo' go on all the time between foreign governments etc.. but not to help get oneself reelected and damage political opponents; the key qualifier is whether what trump was asking for from the ukraine is in the US 'national interests' as opposed to his 'personal interests'...

 

[Harry_BKK]

It wouldn't surprise me if Mr Mulvaney wasn't going to be on the receiving end of an apprentice style 'you're fired!' blast soon.

Lou Dobbs was actually questioning his [mulvaney's] performance a few months back and donald listens to dobbs; will be interesting to see if this qualified 'admission' is covered by fox news tonight, it'll be dobbs who picks up on it if anyone does.

I have always thought variations of 'quid pro quo' go on all the time between foreign governments etc.. but not to help get oneself reelected and damage political opponents; the key qualifier is whether what trump was asking for from the ukraine is in the US 'national interests' as opposed to his 'personal interests'...

I see Paul posted the proof. Of course, "quid pro quos" are done regularly, in our lives too. But according to the US constitution and US law you are not allowed to gather dirt on your political rival. That's it. Simple and straightforward. And Mr T very clearly has sought to get details about Biden, not for any other case, just Biden and kept the military aid back as well as a visit to the WH. How funny that Biden is exactly the case he was interested in.

A Pentagon as well as a State Department committee reached the conclusion in their report that Ukraine had been advancing their fight against government corruption. Based on that the money was approved, this was like March/April or thereabouts.

Then Mr T suddenly halted the release of the funds and is citing now corruption again.

Rudy wasn't investigating corruption as such in Ukraine, it was only two specific cases - Burisma/Biden + 2016 election.

In that phone call, the only case Mr T brings up is Biden. He doesn't ask or mentions any other of the gazillion corruption cases that happened in Ukraine over the years.

So, this was a clear personal "quid pro quo", nothing with his desire to fight corruption overall. And that is against US law and an impeachable offence.

I found it also rather amazing how easily Mulvaney explained why Mr T's Doral was chosen for the next G7 meeting in June 2020. He said they checked 10 locations and Doral was by far the best. When a reporter asked, could we see the test reports to read how you came to that conclusion, Mulvaney snapped: "Of course not".

And he stands there with a straight face, saying: "Mr T will not profit from the event."

Mack, the only clear corruption I see here is Mr T and his sycophants. I hope you will take your blinders off one day!

 

[Harry_BKK]

This is a perfect answer to the braggart's nonsense talk.

In this case, he called Mattis (who he previously praised to the sky) an overrated general, the world's most overrated general to be exact. At the same time, he bragged as usual: "Mattis said it would take 2 years to capture ISIS, I captured them in one month." - Cade Bonespurs saying he personally caught ISIS.

Here's how Mattis answered, putting Mr T right where he belongs.

 

[mack341]

So overnight uk time, there's been two developments, mulvaney has walked back and tried to clarify what he intended to mean and more importantly mike pence has managed to secure a ceasefire from the turks, with the intention that the kurds withdraw out of the buffer zone that the turks require, and the US military will assist the kurds to do this...that's a good thing I think.

As trump also mentioned the 2016 election business/dnc server in his call with zelensky, there could be a national interest angle there. I get a sense going on the transcript it doesn't meet the threshold for your own side impeaching you, which is what is required, the republicans to vote guilty.

It just shows you though how much a wily old operator trump is, and it's his core messages, which he doesn't deviate too far from, which still resonate with a large proportion of the public across america.

The democrats are falling short at the moment, the party is not what it was is it, the dumbed down education system and gesture/token politics have not served it well.

 

[Harry_BKK]

So overnight uk time, there's been two developments, mulvaney has walked back and tried to clarify what he intended to mean and more importantly mike pence has managed to secure a ceasefire from the turks, with the intention that the kurds withdraw out of the buffer zone that the turks require, and the US military will assist the kurds to do this...that's a good thing I think.

As trump also mentioned the 2016 election business/dnc server in his call with zelensky, there could be a national interest angle there. I get a sense going on the transcript it doesn't meet the threshold for your own side impeaching you, which is what is required, the republicans to vote guilty.

It just shows you though how much a wily old operator trump is, and it's his core messages, which he doesn't deviate too far from, which still resonate with a large proportion of the public across america.

The democrats are falling short at the moment, the party is not what it was is it, the dumbed down education system and gesture/token politics have not served it well.

1. Mulvany TRIED to walk back not because he said something wrong but they realized that his real statement had the wrong result/effect.

You see Mack, part of Mr T's strategy is to make outrageous things look normal, no matter how bad they are. E.g. "I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue".

Plus, they knew that Sondland was testifying at the same time. Hence, it was a pre-emptive statement, similar to what we had repeatedly in the last years. Just go back and follow the Stormy story.

The theory of the DNC server has been debunked many times over, just google the latest statement from Bossert, Mr T handpicked and now former Homeland Security Advisor. So please, can you for once follow facts.

2. It is not a ceasefire, the Turks will simply give the Kurds some time to leave. Which means, the US basically forced the Kurds now to give up their homeland. You could compare it with asking Israel to hand over all of Jerusalem to the Palestinians. Mr T simply handed everything to Erdogan, and that not on a silver platter, it is more like a diamond platter.

Erdogan simply gave them something so the three amigos wouldn't return home like a trio of wet poodles. You see, Erdogan is himself a good blinder just like Mr T.

Just as some extra info. The Kurds, although they might ultimately want their own state, were quite content with having an autonomous region in Iraq. And to this day it is the most stable area in the entire region. The proof is that Erbil was the first city to get direct flights from European airlines more than a decade ago. No airline would fly into a city which is not safe.

Similarly, the Kurds established law and order in Northern Syria over the last years and that of course with the backing of the US. Mr T just took that away with a simple phone call from one of his strongman buddies, something he so desperately wants to be but will never make it past the Cadet Bonespurs status.

Again Mack, when will you take your blinders off?

 

[Harry_BKK]

So overnight uk time, there's been two developments, mulvaney has walked back and tried to clarify what he intended to mean and more importantly mike pence has managed to secure a ceasefire from the turks, with the intention that the kurds withdraw out of the buffer zone that the turks require, and the US military will assist the kurds to do this...that's a good thing I think.

As trump also mentioned the 2016 election business/dnc server in his call with zelensky, there could be a national interest angle there. I get a sense going on the transcript it doesn't meet the threshold for your own side impeaching you, which is what is required, the republicans to vote guilty.

It just shows you though how much a wily old operator trump is, and it's his core messages, which he doesn't deviate too far from, which still resonate with a large proportion of the public across america.

The democrats are falling short at the moment, the party is not what it was is it, the dumbed down education system and gesture/token politics have not served it well.

Just an addition to point 1 from above and a little analysis about the entire sequence.

For months, the WH had no press briefings whatsoever and suddenly they have one exactly when Mr T is not in town and Sondland testifies in Congress? Do you really think that this was all coincidence?

According to Mulvaney, he talked to Mr T and some advisers before stepping out onto the podium. Hence, this was a planned and concerted effort.

Now, at the same time, Mr T was on its way to Texas (out of the city and not in reach for a follow-up or similar), Sondland was testifying in Congress exactly about the "quid pro quo" thing (many people, especially the press, would be focused on that).

The WH then calls a briefing on short notice and Mulvaney quickly rattles through what he has to say. In itself, the announcement of using Doral as the next G7 summit location is a deflection (for some a bombshell) as it is an egregious emoluments violation.

So they used one outrageous thing (G7-Doral) and slipped the other ("quid pro quo was involved but it is all normal") in on the side.

Perfect deflection! Or so they thought!

Only that it partially backfired because a few powerful Republicans were not too happy, plus, it gave the Democrats a clear statement from the WH Acting Chief of Staff. So they scrambled quickly and tried to walk it back.

 

[mack341]

1. Mulvany TRIED to walk back not because he said something wrong but they realized that his real statement had the wrong result/effect.

You see Mack, part of Mr T's strategy is to make outrageous things look normal, no matter how bad they are. E.g. "I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue".

Plus, they knew that Sondland was testifying at the same time. Hence, it was a pre-emptive statement, similar to what we had repeatedly in the last years. Just go back and follow the Stormy story.

The theory of the DNC server has been debunked many times over, just google the latest statement from Bossert, Mr T handpicked and now former Homeland Security Advisor. So please, can you for once follow facts.

2. It is not a ceasefire, they will simply give Kurds time to leave. Which means, the US basically forced the Kurds now to give up their homeland. You could compare it with asking Israel to hand over all of Jerusalem to the Palestinians. Mr T simply handed everything to Erdogan, and that not on a silver platter, it is more like a diamond platter.

Erdogan simply gave them something so the three amigos wouldn't return home like a trio of wet poodles. You see, Erdogan is himself a good blinder just like Mr T.

Just as some extra info. The Kurds, although they might ultimately want their own state, were quite content with having an autonomous region in Iraq. And to this day it is the most stable area in the entire region. The proof is that Erbil was the first city to get direct flights from European airlines more than a decade ago. No airline would fly into a city which is not safe.

Similarly, the Kurds established law and order in Northern Syria over the last years and that of course with the backing of the US. Mr T just took that away with a simple phone call from one of his strongman buddies, something he so desperately wants to be but will never make it past the Cadet Bonespurs status.

Again Mack, when will you take your blinders off?

Maybe the kurds will get a similar agreement with the syrian govt, for an autonomous region, as long as the oil proceeds etc.. go to govt.

I don't know enough about the kurds to know whether this area is their 'homeland' I always thought they were 'mountain folk' as it were, saladin from the crusader times was a kurd apparently, he was a sultan so right at the top.

It doesn't bother me re the turks and kurds, but if a blood bath of citizens has been avoided that can only be good. If the armed kurds, the militia, don't want to withdraw it's up to them, they'll lose against the turkish army, so it'll be a pointless waste of life.

The problem of the dnc server is I don't trust the deep state and I don't trust the liberal media, bill binney former technical director of the nsa, no less, has cast doubt on the official narrative [I don't know if he has changed his mind since] The dnc story was too convenient for my mind, the deep state or permanent govt and media lackeys never wanted trump, still don't and will do anything possible, including making up and exaggerating things, to get shot of him.

 

[vorcirion]

Maybe the kurds will get a similar agreement with the syrian govt, for an autonomous region, as long as the oil proceeds etc.. go to govt.

I don't know enough about the kurds to know whether this area is their 'homeland' I always thought they were 'mountain folk' as it were, saladin from the crusader times was a kurd apparently, he was a sultan so right at the top.

It doesn't bother me re the turks and kurds, but if a blood bath of citizens has been avoided that can only be good. If the armed kurds, the militia, don't want to withdraw it's up to them, they'll lose against the turkish army, so it'll be a pointless waste of life.

The problem of the dnc server is I don't trust the deep state and I don't trust the liberal media, bill binney former technical director of the nsa, no less, has cast doubt on the official narrative [I don't know if he has changed his mind since] The dnc story was too convenient for my mind, the deep state or permanent govt and media lackeys never wanted trump, still don't and will do anything possible, including making up and exaggerating things, to get shot of him.

Why do you care about dnc server? What could it possibly contain to have any affect to present times?