Aeneas said:
I don't think it's even a remote possibility. There is no way they could send any significant number of troops to Syria to engage directly with the Syrian army without having air support also. And they can't have air support, period.
Trump orders attack on Syria, asks for other countries to join him.
- Thread starter Alejo
- Start date
I don't think it's even a remote possibility. There is no way they could send any significant number of troops to Syria to engage directly with the Syrian army without having air support also. And they can't have air support, period.
Mr. Premise said:
I had a video of Roger Stone running as I did other things around the house recently. He was speaking about his book "The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ". That is VERY interesting. LBJ was a real dirt bag. Blackmailed JFK with the help of H. Hoover to become the vice president, on and on. Although I wasn't listening with full attenetion the bits I got where informative. The Kennedy's involvement with the mafia was described and the serious animosity involved. I may listen again to get the full story.
From the little I know of his involvement with Nixon, he speaks of him in positive terms. Nixon was to be Rockefeller's man to escalate the Vietnam war etc. but when he didn't deliver, the Watergate set up was created to boot him out.
Pashalis said:
Alex Jones provides a platform for RS and others to speak and he's certainly become a regular feature at Info Wars and gets a lot of air time. I believe the jury is still out on AJ's motives here. It's another "Wait and See" situation.
Joe said:
Thanks Joe. Roger Stone is definitely, passionately identified with his own team and doesn't speak of the broader picture as you say. I don't think that necessarily means he isn't aware of it though. Over all what you say here is good advise for us all. Stay balanced and don't get pulled into the soup.
Thanks everyone for the feed back. :)
Laura said:
Thanks, Laura. I'm taking the magnesium before bed but not the Taurine. "Change will follow turmoil", maybe not exactly how we think but isn't this whole mess due for something better. I think if we try it's not that difficult to imagine a better world in all kinds of fields of endeavor.
Well, whew! I didn't keep up with the thread for two days because I was writing and it just took me two hours to skim over fast and open a bunch of tabs with links, while madly tweeting and Facebooking everything that looked interesting! What a drama! It was fun, too!
Also, in case ya'll don't know, you can hook up with the Pinterest site and save/pin images there that carry links back to where they are located. I've got a "NewsBytes" board where I pin images from articles... you can add comments, too. If we are gonna watch the show... knowing that the heating up of human activity is going to be reflected by cosmic activity - we might as well get out the popcorn and toss our ante into the pot and see where the wheel stops!
Also, in case ya'll don't know, you can hook up with the Pinterest site and save/pin images there that carry links back to where they are located. I've got a "NewsBytes" board where I pin images from articles... you can add comments, too. If we are gonna watch the show... knowing that the heating up of human activity is going to be reflected by cosmic activity - we might as well get out the popcorn and toss our ante into the pot and see where the wheel stops!
angelburst29
The Living Force
Russian President Vladimir Putin said that trust between Russia and the US has degraded under the Donald Trump administration.
Putin: Trust Between US, Russia Degrading under Trump
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960123001251
In an interview on Wednesday, the Russian president told Mir broadcaster that if Trump had intended to bring about a thaw in US relations with Russia, he has failed to see this intention through.
“I would say the level of trust [between Russia and the US] is at a workable level, especially in the military dimension, but it hasn’t improved. On the contrary, it has degraded,” Putin added.
[...] Putin and Trump are yet to meet face to face to discuss the tensions between Russia and the US. A meeting of the two leaders has not been scheduled so far, even though Moscow has indicated it is willing.
Russian Media: 36 US Missiles Downed by Russia in Syria's Shayrat Airbase Attack
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960123001090
The Russian language Nezavisimaya Gazeta daily reported that 36 Tomahawk cruise missiles that the US navy fired at the Syrian Shayrat airbase on Thursday were possibly intercepted by the Russian warplanes.
The paper wrote that this is unlikely that the US missiles were targeted by S300 or S400 air defense systems that are protecting Tartus and Humeimim bases because Tomahawk missiles.
The Russian daily wrote that the US' missiles were possibly targeted by Sukhoi-35s and Sukhoi-30 SM that are capable of intercepting and hitting Tomahawk missiles.
The Russian paper added that the US army had possibly first fired 36 missiles from Ross Striker but after they were intercepted, the Americans launched 23 more missiles to hit Shayrat airbase when the Russian warplanes were going back to their bases.
[...] The US military claims it racked up a perfect score in its cruise missile strike on Syrian airfield in Homs province, targeting aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage areas, ammunition supply bunkers, air defense systems and radars.
But, the Russian Defense Ministry assessed the efficiency of the US strike as quite poor, and disclosed that only 23 out of 59 Tomahawk missiles had reached their target while the points of impact of the remaining 36 missiles were unknown.
Five major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes.
Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical
http://fair.org/home/five-top-papers-run-18-opinion-pieces-praising-syria-strikes-zero-are-critical/
By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:
New York Times
After the Missiles, We Need Smart Diplomacy on Syria (4/7/17)
Acting on Instinct, Trump Upends His Own Foreign Policy (4/7/17) (originally headlined “On Syria Attack, Trump’s Heart Came First”—presumably changed due to social media mockery)
Trump Raises the Stakes for Russia and Iran (4/7/17)
Syria’s ‘Conundrum’: Limited Strikes Risk Entrenching Assad’s Strategy (4/7/17)
Washington Post
Editorial: Trump’s Chance to Step Into the Global Leadership Vacuum (4/7/17)
Trump Enforces the ‘Red Line’ on Chemical Weapons (4/6/17)
Trump Has an Opportunity to Right Obama’s Wrongs in Syria (4/6/17)
Syrian Opposition Leader: Trump Has a Chance to Save Syria (4/7/17)
Was Trump’s Syria Strike a Moral Impulse or a Policy Change? (4/7/17)
Will Trump’s Decision to Strike Syria Reset His Presidency? (4/7/17)
Trump Might Be Going to War. But He Has No Plans for Establishing Peace (4/7/17) (Though the piece has criticism of Trump, it starts by declaring that the missile strikes were “an appropriate response to an act of unspeakable horror.”)
Wall Street Journal
Editorial: Trump’s Syria Opportunity (4/7/17)
With Strike on Syria, Trump Sends a Global Message (4/7/17)
USA Today
Editorial: Trump Pulls the Trigger in Syria (4/7/17)
Syria Missile Strike Could Lead to Political Solution (4/7/17)
Daily News
Praise Trump’s Syria Action, but Question His Explanation (4/7/17)
Trump’s Syria Response Raises Urgent Questions (4/7/17)
Trump’s Syria Action: A Limited Strike for a Specific Purpose (4/7/17)
Some, such as “The Riddle of Trump’s Syria Attack” (New York Times, 4/7/17) and “Was That Syria Attack Legal? Only Congress Can Say” (USA Today, 4/7/17) were value neutral—neither expressly in support of the attacks nor opposing them.
Cable news coverage was equally fawning. In the hours immediately following the attack, MSNBC had on a seemingly never-ending string of military brass and reporters who uncritically repeated the assertion the strikes were “proportional” and “limited.” MSNBC didn’t give a platform to a single dissenting voice until four hours after the attacks began, when host Chris Hayes, according to his own account, had on two guests opposed to the airstrikes in the midnight slot. MSNBC host Brian Williams got into a bit of hot water when he lovingly admired a slick video sent over by the Pentagon showing tomahawk missiles being fired from US navy vessels (FAIR.org, 4/7/17).
CNN’s resident Serious Military Person Lt. Gen Mark Hertling repeated over and over—seemingly on script—that the strikes were “bold, tactical.” CNN’s Fareed Zakaria gushed praise on Trump Friday morning (4/7/17; FAIR.org, 4/7/17), telling host Alisyn Camerota, “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States…. This was a big moment.”
Due to the mostly bipartisan support for the airstrikes, it’s somewhat predictable that corporate media would follow suit. No need to debate the morality or utility of the strikes, because the scene played out per usual: Dictator commits an alleged human rights violation, the media calls on those in power to “do something” and the ticking time bomb compels immediate action, lest we look “weak” on the “global stage.” Anything that deviates from this narrative is given token attention at best.
Two hours of talks with Putin end with nothing to show as Kremlin refuses to admit Assad gassed his own people - then lecture him on Iraq and Libya (Photos - Videos)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4405926/Tillerson-DOES-meet-Vladimir-Putin.html
A multi-level analysis of the US cruise missile attack on Syria and its consequences
http://thesaker.is/a-multi-level-analysis-of-the-us-cruise-missile-attack-on-syria-and-its-consequences/
Putin: Trust Between US, Russia Degrading under Trump
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960123001251
In an interview on Wednesday, the Russian president told Mir broadcaster that if Trump had intended to bring about a thaw in US relations with Russia, he has failed to see this intention through.
“I would say the level of trust [between Russia and the US] is at a workable level, especially in the military dimension, but it hasn’t improved. On the contrary, it has degraded,” Putin added.
[...] Putin and Trump are yet to meet face to face to discuss the tensions between Russia and the US. A meeting of the two leaders has not been scheduled so far, even though Moscow has indicated it is willing.
Russian Media: 36 US Missiles Downed by Russia in Syria's Shayrat Airbase Attack
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960123001090
The Russian language Nezavisimaya Gazeta daily reported that 36 Tomahawk cruise missiles that the US navy fired at the Syrian Shayrat airbase on Thursday were possibly intercepted by the Russian warplanes.
The paper wrote that this is unlikely that the US missiles were targeted by S300 or S400 air defense systems that are protecting Tartus and Humeimim bases because Tomahawk missiles.
The Russian daily wrote that the US' missiles were possibly targeted by Sukhoi-35s and Sukhoi-30 SM that are capable of intercepting and hitting Tomahawk missiles.
The Russian paper added that the US army had possibly first fired 36 missiles from Ross Striker but after they were intercepted, the Americans launched 23 more missiles to hit Shayrat airbase when the Russian warplanes were going back to their bases.
[...] The US military claims it racked up a perfect score in its cruise missile strike on Syrian airfield in Homs province, targeting aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage areas, ammunition supply bunkers, air defense systems and radars.
But, the Russian Defense Ministry assessed the efficiency of the US strike as quite poor, and disclosed that only 23 out of 59 Tomahawk missiles had reached their target while the points of impact of the remaining 36 missiles were unknown.
Five major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes.
Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical
http://fair.org/home/five-top-papers-run-18-opinion-pieces-praising-syria-strikes-zero-are-critical/
By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:
New York Times
After the Missiles, We Need Smart Diplomacy on Syria (4/7/17)Acting on Instinct, Trump Upends His Own Foreign Policy (4/7/17) (originally headlined “On Syria Attack, Trump’s Heart Came First”—presumably changed due to social media mockery)Trump Raises the Stakes for Russia and Iran (4/7/17)Syria’s ‘Conundrum’: Limited Strikes Risk Entrenching Assad’s Strategy (4/7/17)Washington Post
Editorial: Trump’s Chance to Step Into the Global Leadership Vacuum (4/7/17)Trump Enforces the ‘Red Line’ on Chemical Weapons (4/6/17)Trump Has an Opportunity to Right Obama’s Wrongs in Syria (4/6/17)Syrian Opposition Leader: Trump Has a Chance to Save Syria (4/7/17)Was Trump’s Syria Strike a Moral Impulse or a Policy Change? (4/7/17)Will Trump’s Decision to Strike Syria Reset His Presidency? (4/7/17)Trump Might Be Going to War. But He Has No Plans for Establishing Peace (4/7/17) (Though the piece has criticism of Trump, it starts by declaring that the missile strikes were “an appropriate response to an act of unspeakable horror.”)Wall Street Journal
Editorial: Trump’s Syria Opportunity (4/7/17)With Strike on Syria, Trump Sends a Global Message (4/7/17)USA Today
Editorial: Trump Pulls the Trigger in Syria (4/7/17)Syria Missile Strike Could Lead to Political Solution (4/7/17)Daily News
Praise Trump’s Syria Action, but Question His Explanation (4/7/17)Trump’s Syria Response Raises Urgent Questions (4/7/17)Trump’s Syria Action: A Limited Strike for a Specific Purpose (4/7/17)Some, such as “The Riddle of Trump’s Syria Attack” (New York Times, 4/7/17) and “Was That Syria Attack Legal? Only Congress Can Say” (USA Today, 4/7/17) were value neutral—neither expressly in support of the attacks nor opposing them.
Cable news coverage was equally fawning. In the hours immediately following the attack, MSNBC had on a seemingly never-ending string of military brass and reporters who uncritically repeated the assertion the strikes were “proportional” and “limited.” MSNBC didn’t give a platform to a single dissenting voice until four hours after the attacks began, when host Chris Hayes, according to his own account, had on two guests opposed to the airstrikes in the midnight slot. MSNBC host Brian Williams got into a bit of hot water when he lovingly admired a slick video sent over by the Pentagon showing tomahawk missiles being fired from US navy vessels (FAIR.org, 4/7/17).
CNN’s resident Serious Military Person Lt. Gen Mark Hertling repeated over and over—seemingly on script—that the strikes were “bold, tactical.” CNN’s Fareed Zakaria gushed praise on Trump Friday morning (4/7/17; FAIR.org, 4/7/17), telling host Alisyn Camerota, “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States…. This was a big moment.”
Due to the mostly bipartisan support for the airstrikes, it’s somewhat predictable that corporate media would follow suit. No need to debate the morality or utility of the strikes, because the scene played out per usual: Dictator commits an alleged human rights violation, the media calls on those in power to “do something” and the ticking time bomb compels immediate action, lest we look “weak” on the “global stage.” Anything that deviates from this narrative is given token attention at best.
Two hours of talks with Putin end with nothing to show as Kremlin refuses to admit Assad gassed his own people - then lecture him on Iraq and Libya (Photos - Videos)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4405926/Tillerson-DOES-meet-Vladimir-Putin.html
A multi-level analysis of the US cruise missile attack on Syria and its consequences
http://thesaker.is/a-multi-level-analysis-of-the-us-cruise-missile-attack-on-syria-and-its-consequences/
Laura said:
And what a show it is turning out to be... you can't make this stuff up - not The Onion
Trump says he told Xi how he bombed Syria over ‘most beautiful piece of cake'
https://www.rt.com/news/384529-trump-xi-cake-syria/
10 seconds... oh to really know what Xi was thinking.
.
l apprenti de forgeron
The Living Force
It would be interesting to know if her judaism is part of beaming, brainwashing or her own stupidity.msante said:I was reading this short article this morning Ivanka encouraged Syria strike? Eric Trump hints this may be the case and I thought: I know, it just sounds so crazy... can the indignation of Trump's daughter be enough for "the more powerful man of the world" choose fire ~60 missiles, without proofs about the existence of chemical weapons, against everything he said before?
I don't know, I think in it and I say to myself "no, it's just a stupid thing... how the hell could someone be so irresponsible?", but... what about if she had an influense on his decision and we are not taking it in account as part of the equation...
I know that all this can not be so simple, but when I think about Trump reaction to bombing, his public declarations, and how puzzled and unexpected were all this, I finish thinking that nothing is impossible!
The Trump family may not be psychopaths, but they look quite pathological. Why Trump became a politician, if so far he does exactly the same as killary would have done in the international politics? It seems that just to nurture his enormous personal importance -also to win a tacit bet on other oligarchs who mocked him, such as Obama-. Thousands of millions of people may be adversely affected by the decisions of Trump, a guy who seems unbalanced to be president, lacking of principles and criteria.
That is an intelligent and creative attitude to get through the chaos that is being generated.Laura said:
Cam across an article from 2011 in Psychology Today - on the surface, it could be related to any number of threads here, yet the writer (Jeremy E Sherman Ph.D.) brings up a point at the end on Karl Rove and his infamous "play book" (likely essential reading for those in the political scene). Anyway, it's a pretty good article, 'Psychopath Cowboys; Sociopath Herds: A New Theory of How Evil Happens' that features Robert Hare's quotes etc.
So got to thinking about the political field with all the happenings these days, and what the reality might be behind closed doors. It seems to me, possibly, that each leader sitting among their intelligence people might have the same general understanding of events common to each - they well understand the deceptions and lies told - what they tell, along with the power struggles, their own foreign relation targets, policies and trade agreements; corporate interests etc. (including if they are a NATO member state or not). So whatever they know to be true, they stay on script at all cost until they are told to do otherwise, or the script changes to allow some controlled modifications - little diversions among leaders. For public consumption, the show must go on, which does not mean they (the State representatives) do not understand the foundation of lies it is running on. Leaders like Putin have the objective higher ground currently and call them on their lies, yet the play book seems to rule the soundbites and so many people are blinded from the reality at hand.
Anyway, with Karl's play book, it can be applied to many a leader, insider, congressman of senator in how to attack the opponent. You see this in play against Assad, and certainly Putin as is evident. Trump seems to be reading from it for whatever position he is trying to obtain, and people like McCain (a real "Psychopath Cowboy") use the words and actions to suit his aims and who he represents. If Sherman is correct, in that they are helping to build a sociopathic herd, well it sometimes kind of feels that way, at least a herd that has lost its way and the barking Shepherd dogs (the MSN media) have them going this way and that.
The following is from his closing article and the Rove play book (Sherman may have missed the read on Al Franken here {it is satirical though} and Sherman negates the democrats inclusiveness in his words in the article):
Bolded them all as a check mark could be applied to many of these currently in the exchanges we hear, so just adding it as a reminder.
So got to thinking about the political field with all the happenings these days, and what the reality might be behind closed doors. It seems to me, possibly, that each leader sitting among their intelligence people might have the same general understanding of events common to each - they well understand the deceptions and lies told - what they tell, along with the power struggles, their own foreign relation targets, policies and trade agreements; corporate interests etc. (including if they are a NATO member state or not). So whatever they know to be true, they stay on script at all cost until they are told to do otherwise, or the script changes to allow some controlled modifications - little diversions among leaders. For public consumption, the show must go on, which does not mean they (the State representatives) do not understand the foundation of lies it is running on. Leaders like Putin have the objective higher ground currently and call them on their lies, yet the play book seems to rule the soundbites and so many people are blinded from the reality at hand.
Anyway, with Karl's play book, it can be applied to many a leader, insider, congressman of senator in how to attack the opponent. You see this in play against Assad, and certainly Putin as is evident. Trump seems to be reading from it for whatever position he is trying to obtain, and people like McCain (a real "Psychopath Cowboy") use the words and actions to suit his aims and who he represents. If Sherman is correct, in that they are helping to build a sociopathic herd, well it sometimes kind of feels that way, at least a herd that has lost its way and the barking Shepherd dogs (the MSN media) have them going this way and that.
The following is from his closing article and the Rove play book (Sherman may have missed the read on Al Franken here {it is satirical though} and Sherman negates the democrats inclusiveness in his words in the article):
Bolded them all as a check mark could be applied to many of these currently in the exchanges we hear, so just adding it as a reminder.
The longer Trump is in office the more the paralles to Hitler keep coming to my mind. Hitler also started to rattle against the establishment before he became Kanzler and promised to make germany great again. Then as he started his rule he actually implemented quite some things he promised before the election. He creating jobs and road ways and other economic measures that made the lives for many germans better. But that intention was not really for the people, but because it was convinient for his actual goal, which he could only do with that basis. Then after a couple of months/years of making "germany great again" he started to show of his real colour and intentions.
Maybe it is similar with Trump. He doesn't really care about anyone but just needs this groundwork to implement what he really wants.
Maybe it is similar with Trump. He doesn't really care about anyone but just needs this groundwork to implement what he really wants.
Azur
The Living Force
This one is being posted on some forums, and 'quiet conservatives' are timidly coming out.
NSFW: language.
NSFW: language.
