Trumps tide has turned

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Meee32

If the US is going to fight wars, then the US should return to the days of claiming spoils in said wars. I'll be blunt, I honestly don't care if the US decided to invade the entire globe... so long as I don't have to pay for. Make wars pay for themselves or don't fight them, PERIOD.

Wowza... So I assume you don't mind the same done to the US? Maybe Russia and China invade and takes all your resources too, bet you'll be loving that eh? Doesn't it sound a bit extreme?

I understand you don't want to pay for war (who does) but advocating for the stealing of resources is just dangerous territory no? Wasn't it one of the main complaints against the war? That it was just for the oil... But now that's okay?

Pretty surprised anyone agrees this is okay 0.o

a reply to: CrapAsUsual

The problem for me is that Donald doesnt use common sense and discipline, to allow Hillary to choke in her own slime. Yesterday was a good day, but what of tomorrow? That is what concerns me. we're nearing the home stretch and it's time to settle down and focus!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

This is from your link.

At best, one could argue that actions that Obama failed to take (over Clinton’s opposition) helped contribute to the growth of ISIS.

Washington Post

Obama's strategy:

The strategy had given ISIS time to consolidate its control, train terrorists, and embed operatives in Western countries.

Foreign Affairs

Galbraith says that the Sunni Awakening still remains very hostile to the Iraqi government, and the government sees the Awakening as a bigger threat than al-Qaida.

The incoming Obama administration will bring Vice President-elect Joe Biden into the fray, which Galbraith calls "very encouraging."

Biden "has been the prime proponent of a decentralized Iraq, and although in the campaign Sen. McCain described Biden's plan as a 'cockamamie' idea," Galbraith says, "it is in fact what the Bush administration has done."

In 2007, the Bush administration financed a Sunni army — the Awakening — and Galbraith says this is responsible for the success so far in Iraq. Biden would take this to the next step and encourage the Sunnis to form their own region, which would control that army, just as the Kurdistan region controls the Peshmerga, or the Kurdistan army, Galbraith says.

NPR

The Bush administration planted the seeds, the Obama administration nourished isis.

a reply to: UKTruth

Because the last 7 years of policy has created about 10 million new 'voters' who are on the take from the government and said government will pay to drive them to the polls in Moveon.org vehicles...gas paid by Soros.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: UKTruth

Because the last 7 years of policy has created about 10 million new 'voters' who are on the take from the government and said government will pay to drive them to the polls in Moveon.org vehicles...gas paid by Soros.

Indeed - and it's a pretty obvious strategy. Flood the country with dependent immigrants, legal or otherwise. Give illegals the right to vote, change the laws on felons voting. Stack the deck. It's worked incredibly well and will more than likely lead to Clinton being president and a further strengthening of the voter base whilst the country burns and a few get rich.

a reply to: Meee32

If we weaken ourselves to the point where we can't defend it, our bad, have at it, boys.

This is why I support expansion of military spending despite also supporting isolationism.

ETA: I never complained about the idea of "war for oil," I simply said at the time that it was a hollow complaint, not reflective of reality... and I was right. Had we been paying $0.10 a gallon for gas following the Iraq war, I'd have had no beef whatsoever with it. America was built on taking what we needed from groups unable to defend it. It's how we expanded this country. For me to have an issue with that would be self defeating and self limiting, neither of which I am very high on.

a reply to: matafuchs

ISIS result of bad policies - Yes, the growth of ISIS is the fault of the current administration. It was nothing in 03 and the US started funneling funds after 08.

Obama inherited a mess. The 2007 surge had reduced the violence in Iraq by pushing militants into Syria to join forces with the Nusra Front. Bush negotiated the Iraq-US Status of Forces Agreement before leaving office which required us to withdraw our forces by the end of 2011. Let's not forget that public sentiment had rightly turned against the war and the subsequent occupation and that a majority of Americans felt the war was a mistake and that our forces should be withdrawn.

All of those are facts.

Obama tried to negotiate a new agreement to leave behind a force to assist with anti-terrorism and the Iraqis completely balked. The Iraqi parliment wouldn't approve it. The Iraqi people were against it. Muqtada al-Sadr was promising that his militias (Saraya al Salam and the Liwa al Yaom al Mawood aka the "Mahdi Army") would launch attacks against US soldiers, etc.

This notion that the withdrawal is "Obama's fault" is not much more than a political lie.

Again these are all facts, not stupid talking points short enough for an imbecile like Donald Trump to remember. The fact of the matter is that the worst policy decision happened way back with the invasion of Iraq and that there simply weren't any good options for Obama.

As for this "the US started funneling funds after 08" bit, please elaborate.

Iran - 150 billion is the total to be released to Iran under Obamas deal. This is a fact.

$150 billion is the upper estimate. More realistic estimates are about 2/3 of that. Again, you're being awfully vague. The deal is essentially "play ball with us and we'll unfreeze your assets." We're not cutting them a check for $100 billion (or even sending a fleet of cash planes) — it's assets frozen due to sanctions enacted because of their nuclear program. Also, huge chunks of that money will ultimately never make it to Iran because of their debts (like $20 billion to China).

The actual amount Iran will eventually have access to was estimated by Jack Lew to be $56 billion. If Iran getting $56 billion of their own money results in the goal of the sanctions and prevents them from developing a bomb, then what's the problem? Even the Ex-Mossad Chief supported the deal.

Why don't you explain what's wrong with the deal, what we should have done and what you believe Donald Trump would have done differently/better?

The apology tour - This is a fact. He toured the globe and apologized for the US and past digressions.

Blah blah. This is political shenanigans from 8 years ago dreamed up by Karl "Porky Pig" Rove. Yes, Obama did give speeches a few months into his presidency as he essentially introduced himself to the world. Most of that was damage control and trying to make a break from... Karl Rove's employer/creation, Bush 43.

Why don't you tell us where Obama was wrong in anything he said. This crap resurfacing now just shows how establishment Queen Trump is.

Failure in Libya - It does not matter if at one time Trump supported it the SecState and the US admin lost it in Libya. They killed a dictator and it was turned over the radical Islamic terrorists.

It does matter. In fact, I would argue that the biggest problem with the Obama administration is that they're too much like past Republican administrations when it comes to arming "rebels" and the like and furthermore, that Trump wouldn't have done anything differently. The biggest difference is that Trump would be even less capable of making the decisions because he doesn't know ANYTHING about ANYTHING and he's a rash, petty, unstable buffoon. Doubt me? His words not enough? He went to kiss Kissinger's ring and came away claiming that Kissinger endorsed his policies' —a claim not dissimilar to Hillary's that Kissinger told her she ran the State Department "better than anybody had run it in a long time."

I could keep this up if you like but you're going to have to up your freakin game and stop trying to talk Trumpesque vagueries and claim "it's common knowledge" as your defense because frankly, most people are ignorant.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I would also add to your accurate assessment that Trump just declared that any country opposing ISIS should be our ally. He specifically named Russia and this would also logically include Iran. And as just reported, the Russians are now launching airstrikes in Syria from Iran. So how do we reconcile this proposed policy with complaints about Obama negotiating a treaty with Iran?

His tide has turned because he was able to read a prepared speech that someone else wrote for him off of a teleprompter? Is that where the bar is set for him less than 3 months to the general? LOL

a reply to: Agit8dChop

One word..... WOW

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: theantediluvian

I would also add to your accurate assessment that Trump just declared that any country opposing ISIS should be our ally. He specifically named Russia and this would also logically include Iran. And as just reported, the Russians are now launching airstrikes in Syria from Iran. So how do we reconcile this proposed policy with complaints about Obama negotiating a treaty with Iran?

Iran fund ISIS so why would they be included? Before jumping to a response that Iran and ISIS are enemies, please research fully.
As for Russia, for now it makes sense to cooperate to destroy ISIS and every other terrorist organisation. Who knows what that relationship might create - perhaps more understanding. One thing is for sure, Russia are the good guys when compared to the US.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I was reading your post with interest and then you said "Trump doesn't know ANYTHING about ANYTHING". I will now assume the rest of your post was complete nonsense.

By the way, one thing you missed from your history of the Iraq withdrawal was the analyst reports that Obama did not even try to renegotiate the 2008 deal despite being fully aware that a withdrawal would lead to a significant risk. In other words he failed to act on new information that Bush did not have and he failed to convince the govt of Iraq to alter the deal. It's easy to blame Bush (he was a complete joke after all) but Obama had 3 years to fully assess the situation and work to make the right call. He did nothing and now we have ISIS.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I am with you on every thing you said re: Obama.

He did inherit a colossal mistake with Iraq..
He did have to pay the bill on the Wall St Bailout..
Jobs, Industry were all in decline..

For years people complained (me included) that this was Bush's fault and the Obama government needed to be given time to work it out. I was 100% in that frame of mind,I like Obama and I believe he could have done great things if the republicans didn't fight him every step of the way

But, none of that matters any more. What matters is who is the best person to expose all that corruption and the crap policies and do something about them.

That person is most definitely NOT Hillary Clinton - and this is only a 2 horse race.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: theantediluvian

I would also add to your accurate assessment that Trump just declared that any country opposing ISIS should be our ally. He specifically named Russia and this would also logically include Iran. And as just reported, the Russians are now launching airstrikes in Syria from Iran. So how do we reconcile this proposed policy with complaints about Obama negotiating a treaty with Iran?

Iran fund ISIS .....

You don't know what you're talking about. Sorry, don't know a polite way to put it.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: theantediluvian

I would also add to your accurate assessment that Trump just declared that any country opposing ISIS should be our ally. He specifically named Russia and this would also logically include Iran. And as just reported, the Russians are now launching airstrikes in Syria from Iran. So how do we reconcile this proposed policy with complaints about Obama negotiating a treaty with Iran?

Iran fund ISIS .....

You don't know what you're talking about. Sorry, don't know a polite way to put it.

I did warn you to research properly. Are you quite certain they are not funding ISIS in certain regions of the ME?

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Wow, Fox News is anti Trump and PRO HILLARY?? What! What! What!

You lose me right there! Why is it so hard for Trump supporters to acknowledge that Trump says very insulting and stupid things. Not only that, he's a pathological liar and King Hypocrite!! Please, for the love god, denying any of the above is embracing ignorance!

That's why he's losing the popularity vote! Fox News can't even keep him afloat and Bill O'Reilly has tried his best!

Trump is a close minded person yet you want me to watch his speech with an open mind? That's how you get brainwashed, if you ask me.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: theantediluvian

I would also add to your accurate assessment that Trump just declared that any country opposing ISIS should be our ally. He specifically named Russia and this would also logically include Iran. And as just reported, the Russians are now launching airstrikes in Syria from Iran. So how do we reconcile this proposed policy with complaints about Obama negotiating a treaty with Iran?

Iran fund ISIS .....

You don't know what you're talking about. Sorry, don't know a polite way to put it.

I did warn you to research properly. Are you quite certain they are not funding ISIS in certain regions of the ME?

Convenience is the Enemy of Research.

The U.S. is currently providing air support for Iranian financed Shia militias led by Iranian military personnel in attacks on IS in Iraq.

And the Iranians are also financing IS? So, the Iranians are fighting against themselves?

originally posted by: DelMarvel
The U.S. is currently providing air support for Iranian financed Shia militias led by Iranian military personnel in attacks on IS in Iraq.

And the Iranians are also financing IS? So, the Iranians are fighting against themselves?

The argument goes they originally funded Isis to destabilize Iraq. Than they could sweep in as saviors but it got out of hand. And they lost control and it became a threat to them as well. Wouldn't be the first time that's happened. It stems from factions of Isis saying they were supposed weopons and financial support from Iran. Would have been effective if Syria was a mess but they quickly expanded into Syria as well with nothing to stop them. I personally am not convinced this is thr case but I will say it's within the realm of possibility.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Agit8dChop

Wow, Fox News is anti Trump and PRO HILLARY?? What! What! What!

You lose me right there! Why is it so hard for Trump supporters to acknowledge that Trump says very insulting and stupid things. Not only that, he's a pathological liar and King Hypocrite!! Please, for the love god, denying any of the above is embracing ignorance!

That's why he's losing the popularity vote! Fox News can't even keep him afloat and Bill O'Reilly has tried his best!

Trump is a close minded person yet you want me to watch his speech with an open mind? That's how you get brainwashed, if you ask me.

So instead of make up your own mind your going to go with what thr media tells you?? Hmmmmm well if your unwilling to evaluate things with a open mind all I can say us programing works. Because I'll say this Trump hasn't lied under oath and most of what people call lies is simply the date when he claimed to be against the war. He said it was from thr beginning but it appears it was a year later. Which is exactly what happened to many amaricans they were for it at first than things changed as thr 911 fervor died down.