Jump to content
PurpleCanary

President Trump

Recommended Posts

Whatever your views on whether the current actions by the President are right or wrong these are facts.

On the ground reporting from NBC. 

On the ground.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Boy, it would be nice if the American public heard this from the President himself, or failing that the Secretary of State, or the Secretary of Defense, or even the White House Communications Director. 

But no, via Twitter based on a journalist asking questions - and now confirmed by Reuters. Leaving a country after a conflict because you want to is honorable, but leaving because you have to is shameful. It is clear what this withdrawal is. 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-withdrawal/in-letter-u-s-military-tells-iraq-it-will-withdraw-idUSKBN1Z520A

 

Withdrawle.jpg

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume British forces were informed or have they found out on twitter as well FFS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Surfer said:

 

Withdrawle.jpg

Now they are saying this was a "draft" and "should not have been sent" - but it was still sent.

This is just outright incompetence on full public display. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Meanwhile, Senate Republican just don't want to hear anything about an Impeachment Trial. 

p.s. not one of them has commented about the Iraq / Iran fiasco. 

Senate Republicans introduced a resolution Monday that would amend the rules to allow them to dismiss President Donald Trump’s articles of impeachment, without any debate, if the House of Representatives does not transfer them for trial before next week.

https://www.courthousenews.com/senate-republicans-push-rule-change-to-dismiss-impeachment/

And despite the President blocking witnesses from testifying to the House here is Senator Rubio saying if you didn't testify to the House you shouldn't testify to the Senate (despite the House being obstructed by the President - which is one of the articles of impeachment) 

 

 

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole situation is outrageous.

Iran and the US sends troops, under whichever guise they choose, to a foreign state. What gives them the right? Just how would these nations like it if they were invaded by other countries troops. Forget the UN, a new born baby has more teeth.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking of the UN ... maybe they should move that out of the USA as well. Geneva seems nice. 

UN.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the Israelis have distanced themselves from this trump brainfart. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic that there were more killed at the funeral of Soleimani that in the actual bombing that created it.

What a very strange world it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

The whole situation is outrageous.

Iran and the US sends troops, under whichever guise they choose, to a foreign state. What gives them the right? Just how would these nations like it if they were invaded by other countries troops. Forget the UN, a new born baby has more teeth.

 

When it comes to Iraq, the Iraqi government has invited both the US (and UK) and Iran into the country. So much of the present crisis stems from the duplicity of Iraq trying to play both sides at once.

US and UK troops operate a peace-keeping and training role in Iraq, and their government is very happy to see them there keeping Isis at bay, and providing lots of foreign aid. 

But at the same time the Iraqis are allowing the Iranians to have influence in their domestic politics. Sunni Muslims have been kicked out of the army, the police and the Iraqi government at the behest of the Iranians, of whom  Soleimani was one of the key players.

By letting the Iranians have so much influence in Iraq, their government created a grave threat to the Western presence in Iraq which culminated in the Iranian co-ordinated attacks on the US embassy in Baghdad.

When embassies come under direct military attack, the embassy nation has every right to defend itself and its citizens. The drone assassination was a measured and correct response against that attack. It also demonstrates the difficulties of dealing with duplicitous Middle Eastern nations and if we withdraw and let them get on with killing each other rather than killing our people.

But as soon as we do withdraw, then the cry goes up from the usual suspects, why are we letting all these innocent people die and why aren't we going in and helping them - whether it be marsh arabs, kurds, yazidiqis or whoever? The US is damned if they do and damned if they don't. 

One thing we must do is protect ourselves. The Iranian nuclear programme is a direct threat to the west. We must now go in there with drones and destroy their nuclear enrichment facilities, and raze it all to the ground.

Edited by Rock The Boat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Is that from the latest Oval Office press release RTB?

Lot's of Iranians are happy with the take down of Soleimani, KG. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn’t answer KG’s question did you? Who’s messaging points were those? All your own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

Lot's of Iranians are happy with the take down of Soleimani, KG. 

Do you have any evidence of this? Quite a few exiled Iranians are understandably happy but what about the Iranians back in Iran? 

And no, twitter bots are not evidence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

On your messaging points you are right about one thing - you are damned if you leave and damned if you don’t. Everything else is self- serving justification for 3 actions. 1 the US and UK INVADED Iraq they were NOT invited. 2. the US disbanded the entire Army which was mainly comprised of Sunni - a minority but politically ruling over the Shia majority. With access to guns and explosives but no pay, they started the insurgency.. 3. the US, UK, EU Russia and China had a perfectly good nuclear ragreement with Iran that this US administration decided to unilaterally tear up and threaten its allies if they didn’t do the same. All because Obama has negotiated it, or because Israel objected to it? 
 
So spare us the sage, worldly wise tut tutting, from “national security”  policy hawks who want revenge on Iran for whatever passes for reason in their brain - they are engineering another war in the Mid East. 

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question to my Republican friends that I just get blank stares back on. Why don’t they convict the President of the Impeachment charges? if they did then VP Mike Pence would become President and he appoints another Republican to become the VP - Nicky Haley for example. 
 

Pence would continue the same policies, on taxes, environment, anti-abortion, healthcare and judges as Trump, but without the obvious insanity, and could quickly clean house of the idiots like de Voss, Carson in the cabinet too. 
 

So what is it they are scared of? That Trump, like Samson, would bring the whole party down with him? Is there some scandal at the heart of their party that is so much worse than some blistering editorials from the Fox News crowd after ejecting President Trump? You have to wonder are they perhaps compromised by Russian money or intelligence too? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Surfer said:

On your messaging points you are right about one thing - you are damned if you leave and damned if you don’t. Everything else is self- serving justification for 3 actions. 1 the US and UK INVADED Iraq they were NOT invited. 2. the US disbanded the entire Army which was mainly comprised of Sunni - a minority but politically ruling over the Shia majority. With access to guns and explosives but no pay, they started the insurgency.. 3. the US, UK, EU Russia and China had a perfectly good nuclear ragreement with Iran that this US administration decided to unilaterally tear up and threaten its allies if they didn’t do the same. All because Obama has negotiated it, or because Israel objected to it? 
 
So spare us the sage, worldly wise tut tutting, from “national security”  policy hawks who want revenge on Iran for whatever passes for reason in their brain - they are engineering another war in the Mid East. 

They were invaded by George Bush as part of the second Gulf War but we're not talking about going that far back. We're talking about the situation today. And those US and UK troops are in Iraq by invitation. You don't send letters to a government that you're invading.

The Bush government did disband the Iraqi army but again that is now a historical fact. And they rebuilt the army with both Sunni and Shiite forces, in an honourable attempt to bring both factions of Muslim society together. It was when the duplicitous Iraqi government started to allow Iranian influence into the country that all the good work stated to unravel when tens of thousands of Sunnis were thrown out of the army, police and government and imprisoned. Don't forget where Soleimani was when he was killed. Not in Iran, but in Baghdad where he was planning major attacks on the west. So we can assume that the Iraqi government was enabling terrorists a safe space to meet up and co-ordinate their attacks on us.

I'm not sure on what grounds you think the nuclear agreement with Iran was a good one? The views coming from the White House suggest that Ira was not complying with the terms of the agreement, that they were processing material that could be used in a nuclear device, that they were actively engaged in planning further terrorist events in the west, and taking part in hostile activities in the Gulf and the Mediterranean. 

There is no evidence that Trump is a hawk, as much as would like that narrative, in fact he has so far shown very little military response during his tenure as President. If Trump wanted to engineer a war he could very easily set out to flatten Tehran, similar to how Obama has bombed out much of Syria. He hasn't. We've had a single precision missile targeting a very precise target. It was a job well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Surfer said:

A question to my Republican friends that I just get blank stares back on. Why don’t they convict the President of the Impeachment charges? if they did then VP Mike Pence would become President and he appoints another Republican to become the VP - Nicky Haley for example. 
 

Pence would continue the same policies, on taxes, environment, anti-abortion, healthcare and judges as Trump, but without the obvious insanity, and could quickly clean house of the idiots like de Voss, Carson in the cabinet too. 
 

So what is it they are scared of? That Trump, like Samson, would bring the whole party down with him? Is there some scandal at the heart of their party that is so much worse than some blistering editorials from the Fox News crowd after ejecting President Trump? You have to wonder are they perhaps compromised by Russian money or intelligence too? 

Do you mean in the same way the Democrats are compromised by the Clinton's selling 20% of America's uranium resources to the Russians.

And where did Obama get $17m to buy a beachside property in Martha's Vineyard. Money he didn't have at the beginning of his Presidency.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a super-wealthy President who didn't need to get involved in pork barell politics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

They were invaded by George Bush as part of the second Gulf War but we're not talking about going that far back. 

The Bush government did disband the Iraqi army but again that is now a historical fact.

Don't forget where Soleimani was when he was killed. Not in Iran, but in Baghdad where he was planning major attacks on the west. 

I'm not sure on what grounds you think the nuclear agreement with Iran was a good one? The views coming from the White House suggest that Iran was not complying with the terms of the agreement

There is no evidence that Trump is a hawk

1. I'm sure the Iraqi's won't so quickly brush off the fact they were invaded. US troops have been there ever since. 

2. There you go. The insurgency that killed the majority of US troops and thousand of Iraqis flowed from that action. 

3. No evidence has been produced to back up that claim. The Iraqi PM said Trump asked them to meet in Bhagdad. 

4. The views from the White House are contradicted by all of our allies and the nuclear inspectors. Iran WAS complying. 

5. Trump? No. Those around him and on Fox - absolutely yes. He's a weak man that follows the latest word in his ear. 

 

 

 

War Crimes I.jpg

War Crimes II.jpg

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In cold wars and tensions, people do get taken out. But never anyone at this level RTB.

I have no wish to defend Iran and its clandestine efforts to control the Middle East despite them representing only themselves and Shia minorities on the area. They are obviously governed in a way that is alien to us in the West and much of their policy is far from politically and humanely inspired.

But the sanctions, not only the severe US ones but those by the EU, were believed to have been working and there was an opinion that there was unrest with the people against their governments foreign policy.

But to take out, to all intents and purposes, their VP is not something we would have accepted had it been the other way round. The world would have been in uproar if Pence had been assassinated by an Iranian missile in Iraq.

The silence from most western governments is ample illustration that they don't agree with what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Surfer said:

1. I'm sure the Iraqi's won't so quickly brush off the fact they were invaded. US troops have been there ever since. 

2. There you go. The insurgency that killed the majority of US troops and thousand of Iraqis flowed from that action. 

3. No evidence has been produced to back up that claim. The Iraqi PM said Trump asked them to meet in Bhagdad. 

4. The views from the White House are contradicted by all of our allies and the nuclear inspectors. Iran WAS complying. 

5. Trump? No. Those around him and on Fox - absolutely yes. He's a weak man that follows the latest word in his ear. 

 

 

 

War Crimes I.jpg

War Crimes II.jpg

Trump is one of the most insecure and needy leaders in living memory. He needs constant validation. Quite why someone with severe personality disorders got to the top is barmy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a perfect response to very simplistic "but he's a terrorist" questioning from a leading "Democrat Presidential candidate" 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

Trump is one of the most insecure and needy leaders in living memory. He needs constant validation. Quite why someone with severe personality disorders got to the top is barmy.

For that you can blame who is funding rightwing TV, radio and press as well as much of the Republican Party. The Russians joining in via Social media just icing on the cake. Similar scenario in the UK with its press too - but corrupting the BBC being the icing there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Meanwhile, there has not yet been an impeachment enquiry for violation of the Constitution's Emoluments Clause.

But there could be... 

... for activities like this. 

" A closer examination of the time frame surrounding the application and registration of these trademarks reveals that they coincided with the Trump administration’s reversals on tariffs on Argentina " 

https://www.citizensforethics.org/trump-argentina-trademarks/

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Meanwhile, like all schoolyard bullies who finally get called out, they have their minions work out how to spite the other children.

After Trump’s threat, administration begins drafting possible sanctions against Iraq 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/06/trump-administration-begins-drafting-possible-sanctions-against-iraq-following-trumps-economic-threat/

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.thumb.png.86fa170102a46810f4dc5a5acfc09893.png

Anyone who does not understand the above should keep re-reading it until they do. 😀

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

More on the warmongers .... the President will address the nation in a few hours. Will he have been listening to Hannity, Gorka, North or Ingram on Fox News last night or to Tucker Carlson? This is the undue influence of Rupert Murdoch's media empire on this President.... whatever the Fox News opinion hosts say goes (usually) - so we'll see..... 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/sean-hannity-on-iran-retaliation-there-is-a-massive-price-to-pay

North.jpg

Gorka.jpg

Ingram.jpg

Graham.jpg

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Surfer said:

More on the warmongers .... the President will address the nation in a few hours. Will he have been listening to Hannity, Gorka, North or Ingram on Fox News last night or to Tucker Carlson? This is the undue influence of Rupert Murdoch's media empire on this President.... whatever the Fox News opinion hosts say goes (usually) - so we'll see..... 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/sean-hannity-on-iran-retaliation-there-is-a-massive-price-to-pay

North.jpg

Gorka.jpg

Ingram.jpg

Graham.jpg

Gorka, Ingraham & Insanity!

Mad, mad & madder! They define the term RWNJ.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...