webdiplomacy.net

Jeff Kuta wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 02, 2018 5:25 pm

Talk is cheap, and that's pretty much all Trump ever is.

And sometimes he talks.

Well, no. Very much no, in fact. Compare and contrast Trump and Obama in the region. Obama makes a big deal of chemical weapons being a red line, but does sod all when Syria crosses it. When Syria used chemical weapons under Trump's watch the response was a 3 score cruise missile strike against Syrian air power. The idea that Trump is all bluster is a myth created by the American left as a comfort blanket, and is very different from the truth known in Iran.

And yet Bashar Al-Assad consolidated his power and crushed even more of his civilians with Russian backing. What did the U.S. ultimately get out of it? A stable Iraq? Hardly. They love Russia more now too. Seems like a big Trump failure to me.

All this will lead to is more nations pivoting toward Russia and away from the west. Asia is a tough neighborhood to occupy, especially if your home is 3000 miles away. Even the Soviets eventually gave up in Afghanistan and they shared a border at the time.

Trump restored America's position as a nation whose words can't be ignored. Obama lost the bulk of Syria to Putin and Assad years ago, and there was little anyone could do to change that. But what Trump did do was increase the supply of heavy weapons to friendly rebel groups that will significantly increase their negotiating power, and has helped them drive back ISIS in some areas. Much like giving the military more freedom to act in Iraq helped drive back ISIS there.

Octavious is 100% correct.

Obama colluded with the Iranian Government and didn't do anything to stop ISIS and Trump is doing everything he can to roll back Radical Islamic Terrorism and Iran's influence. Bravo!

What "friendly rebel groups" are you talking about?

Trump does not support the Free Syrian Army. They will wither and die now. Their arms were supplied by the Obama administration.

Obama provided some military hardware to the Kurds. Trump backed down to Erdogan and ceased U.S. backing of them.

Trump is a fool.

ND wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:53 pm

Octavious is 100% correct.

Obama colluded with the Iranian Government and didn't do anything to stop ISIS and Trump is doing everything he can to roll back Radical Islamic Terrorism and Iran's influence. Bravo!

Wait, colluded with the Iranian government? He helped facilitate these protests.

I think ND might be a Markov chain

Yeah he colluded with the Iranian Government. Records have been released showing that Obama didn't want the Feds to crack down on drugs being peddled by Iranian backed groups in the US so he could get Iran to the negotiating table for his dumb deal. That's collusion if I've ever seen it.

Source? Or are you going to tell me that it's easy to find and everyone knows it, yet again?

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2 ... stigation/

From Politico, I trust that will be sufficiently liberal for you?

This is just one of many sources that discuss how Obama colluded with Iran.

Okay but again the point of the nuclear deal was to create a popular push for regime change in Iran. Let off in the short term for long term anti-Iranian hopes.

Here's the thing. The point of this article shows that Obama colluded with the Iranian regime and Radical Islamic Terrorists to peddle drugs in America for years. Where are the Congressional investigations? It also shows he supported the official government against protests. Whereas, Trump is not and does not support those people. Thank god. #MAGA

It's almost as if ND doesn't recall that Iran/Contra was for Reagan.

Hate to call you out, Jeff, but that's whataboutism. Reagan doing the same thing doesn't excuse Obama doing it.

You may not like whatever Obama did to try and secure an Iranian nuclear deal, but he did not hypocritically lie to the American people about what was going on there like Reagan did. The goal was always get a deal done, not "call Iran evil and then do some other doubly evil shit" on top of it.

More Congressional investigations? LOL. They should investigate the current administration instead.

And FWIW, Politico isn't even close to being "liberal." They tilt slightly conservative from my POV.

ND is so far right he probably considers Fox center-left.

Glad to see some things never changed with this new forum.

Always love Con-man's name calling. I won't stoop to his infantile and immature level.

bo_sox48 wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:36 am

Glad to see some things never changed with this new forum.