Very important piece to read. We may quibble over the details but we are in the most unstable period in decades and we are under-performing.

https://warontherocks.com/2018/03/jim-mattis-fires-a-clear-warning-shot/

Yup, that and the hiring of Bolton who would love to just bomb the crap out of the middle east and NK, we are moving into scary territory.

Yup, that and the hiring of Bolton who would love to just bomb the crap out of the middle east and NK, we are moving into scary territory.

Wow - that is pretty short sighted :bsod: :rollem: .

These conditions did not start 14 months ago - they have been rolling for 2 decades building up to now. There were plenty of missed opportunities by ALL ADMINS to correct or mitigate this course

I'm just saying, you know how quickly Trump can go off, having his third national security adviser with those tendencies from his past (not likely they have gone away) isn't what I'd like in the latest hiring.

“America’s military has no preordained right to victory on the battlefield.”

Some one should tell congress or the American people this.. America has convince its self since the end of WW2 that we are undefeatable

it took 20 years to get where we are today because we followed the threat , and we will change again adapt and overcome thats how it works

I see china and Russia are both nations who are all on equal footing in technology.. No Country has the clear advantage in the air on land or at Sea .. so we are back to a mutual assured destruction policy..

And with Bolton on Deck with a clear history I think its unfair to expect Mattis to be a buffer .. Dont forget He was a general they carry out orders .. if he last's another year

Perhaps this is why Trump wanted that huge raise in the military budget, and was willing to sign the otherwise Porky spending bill. And, perhaps, he was listening to Mattis when he insisted on the huge influx of money into military spending.

An maybe this is why, among other things, he is willing to be more diplomatic rather than hostile toward powerful opponents such as Putin and China and not so much to weaker ones such as NK.

Perhaps this is why Trump wanted that huge raise in the military budget, and was willing to sign the otherwise Porky spending bill. And, perhaps, he was listening to Mattis when he insisted on the huge influx of money into military spending.

An maybe this is why, among other things, he is willing to be more diplomatic rather than hostile toward powerful opponents such as Putin and China and not so much to weaker ones such as NK.
I hope you didn't just give yourself a hernia.

I hope you didn't just give yourself a hernia.

Are you asking him out on a date?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I hope you didn't just give yourself a hernia.

Military has been generally baseline funded (with a lot of overseas stuff going on) for many years due to the CR. You already know this but it is not convenient for you.

I didn’t read it. Are we gonna die soon?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn’t read it. Are we gonna die soon?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Not as long as you give the military industrial complex all the money it needs so it can make sure that all the conflicts that the military industrial complex supplies don't affect us.

I didn’t read it. Are we gonna die soon?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The last 5-6 years has brought us to the most dangerous time since the 80s so maybe...

Great Peer Competition is back on strong. Our gov (as well as EU) dropped the ball on some good opportunities to shape the world but we punted (overall).

Not as long as you give the military industrial complex all the money it needs so it can make sure that all the conflicts that the military industrial complex supplies don't affect us.

Lol. It’s like fisheries management. The main objective is to solve problems that were previously created by solving another problem
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lol. It’s like fisheries management. The main objective is to solve problems that were previously created by solving another problem
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
You Prit neah got it

5-8 years more like since the Iraq war and Afghanistan both focused the American people and congress to focus on the bogy man.. Islamic terrorism . which Iraq and Afghanistan helped Fuel

not sure John what missed opportunities your referring to .. But its clear the big picture hasn't been in view since bush SR and isn't getting much attention now under the current administration . and the current 61 Billion needs to be spent by sept glad some going to the pay of our troops

but $61 billion increase matches or even surpasses Russia's entire military budget each year

so how is Russia a threat if their whole budget is around 61 billion and ours is 700 billion ..

must be the invisible f-35 $94.6 million each

5-8 years more like since the Iraq war and Afghanistan both focused the American people and congress to focus on the bogy man.. Islamic terrorism . which Iraq and Afghanistan helped Fuel



You know the Boogeyman isn't real, right?

You know the Boogeyman isn't real, right?

bogy man is different...what's wrong with you???

bogy man is different...what's wrong with you???

Where's the "Analogy Police" when you need them?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

5-8 years more like since the Iraq war and Afghanistan both focused the American people and congress to focus on the bogy man.. Islamic terrorism . which Iraq and Afghanistan helped Fuel

not sure John what missed opportunities your referring to .. But its clear the big picture hasn't been in view since bush SR and isn't getting much attention now under the current administration . and the current 61 Billion needs to be spent by sept glad some going to the pay of our troops

but $61 billion increase matches or even surpasses Russia's entire military budget each year

so how is Russia a threat if their whole budget is around 61 billion and ours is 700 billion ..

must be the invisible f-35 $94.6 million each


Last 5-6 years is when the threat for significant war increased dramatically.

We failed (US, EU) in general in bringing about a more stable world. Lots of good was done - reduced poverty, famine, etc but overall we could have done better.

For military budget we spend more on our personnel than any other country - this is a big cost. As is bureaucracy (something to keep in mind next time Gov should run something). Russia and China buy stuff far cheaper than we do and treat their people far worse.

Yes = procurement sucks

not sure John what missed opportunities your referring to ..
John has excellent hindsight.

Where's the "Analogy Police" when you need them?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

sorry i hurt your feelings :buds:

John has excellent hindsight.


I have thought of going back over must major topics we've debated WRT foreign policy and shown that my predictions have been more correct than wrong: Obama, Libya, Russia, China, Syria, Iran, NORKS, AFG pullout, Horses and Bayonets, National Debt

I have thought of going back over must major topics we've debated WRT foreign policy and shown that my predictions have been more correct than wrong: Obama, Libya, Russia, China, Syria, Iran, NORKS, AFG pullout, Horses and Bayonets, National Debt
They're not predictions when they're made after the fact.

What does your hindsight say about the impending abandonment of Syria?

They're not predictions when they're made after the fact.

What does your hindsight say about the impending abandonment of Syria?

My hindsight says good - get out. ISIS is hit pretty hard. Whack-A-Mole if you have to. But it is a terrible mess - how do we support the Kurds that helped us with ISIS defend themselves against our ally Turkey? By sending the French to position themselves between the Turks and Kurds? Or will it be the Russ/Syrians against the Turks against the French against the US/Kurds. Ohhh and then their is the FSA - where do they fit? The Iranians are getting bombed by the Israeils.

The biggest issue is contact with US v RUS v Turk forces around the Euphrates. The Russians sent a group of RU Mercs / Syrians to attack US forces/Kurds in February. US forces kept asking the RUS on the deconfliction line if they were their guys and the RUS said no. US forces threw everything at them, killing by some reports several hundred Russian Mercenaries.

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!
Where did I put my NatSec hat again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where did I put my NatSec hat again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, he acted stupidly - too bad he did not have horses and bayonets

Its like watching a 13 year old respond to a taunt thrown his way, very professional response, maybe he should tell Putin when and where so he can get ready.

Well at least he didn't tell our enemies what he was going to do. ;)

Well at least he didn't tell our enemies what he was going to do. ;)
Trump wouldn't do that...

Right now Russia and Syria are busy co-mingling assets.

I am not against the use of force but its not a game . and the russian response was on point his base loves the tough guy talk and sounds like a conservative snowflake

Much of the bad blood with Russia is caused by the Fake & Corrupt Russia Investigation, headed up by the all Democrat loyalists, or people that worked for Obama. Mueller is most conflicted of all (except Rosenstein who signed FISA & Comey letter). No Collusion, so they go crazy!

he sounds like a conservative snowflake


“We do not participate in Twitter diplomacy,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. “We support serious approaches. We continue to believe that it is important not to take steps that could harm an already fragile situation.”

love the russian response


Wait . . . I thought it was Trump who loved the Russians . . .

A war will start over someone's tweet about misinformation that they saw on television, Sad.
He could go back to Mar a Lago and play golf, and leave governing to the grownups.

Wait . . . I thought it was Trump who loved the Russians . . .
Even he knew down deep the bromance wasn’t going to last, eventually he finally get the workings of the world stage and the love of Putin had to be put aside to man up.

Not sure from a strategic vantage point, it’s smart for DJT to be tweeting what we plan to do, seems stupid to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A war will start over someone's tweet about misinformation that they saw on television, Sad.

You must mean saw on Fox. The others don't do fake news.

Even he knew down deep the bromance wasn’t going to last, eventually he finally get the workings of the world stage and the love of Putin had to be put aside to man up.

So it was actually bromance not collusion. Are you also able to see the future?

Not sure from a strategic vantage point, it’s smart for DJT to be tweeting what we plan to do, seems stupid to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm sure the Russians and Syrians know that Trump lies.

I'm sure the Russians and Syrians know that Trump lies.
I will let Muellers team make the judgement call on collusion, but pretty damn sure they had (maybe one way Putin I think is smarter) a bromance.

Sad we are all in agreement he is a habitual liar!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am not against the use of force but its not a game . and the russian response was on point his base loves the tough guy talk and sounds like a conservative snowflake

Much of the bad blood with Russia is caused by the Fake & Corrupt Russia Investigation, headed up by the all Democrat loyalists, or people that worked for Obama. Mueller is most conflicted of all (except Rosenstein who signed FISA & Comey letter). No Collusion, so they go crazy!

he sounds like a conservative snowflake


“We do not participate in Twitter diplomacy,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. “We support serious approaches. We continue to believe that it is important not to take steps that could harm an already fragile situation.”


Most of the bad blood with Russia is because Russia is acting like a large Crime Family - which they are, but with nukes. This is Russia and how Russia acts for 300 years, but with Nukes

Most of the bad blood with Russia is because Russia is acting like a large Crime Family - which they are, but with nukes. This is Russia and how Russia acts for 300 years, but with Nukes

And that my friend is what makes this so unsettling
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I will let Muellers team make the judgement call on collusion, but pretty damn sure they had (maybe one way Putin I think is smarter) a bromance.

Yes, you're pretty damn sure. And you even knew that Trump knew down deep that the bromance wouldn't last. Since you know so much for damn sure about what Trump knew and what romance was in his heart for Putin, it seems that you should pretty damn sure know whether Trump colluded, and wonder if you could also see the future as well. Like, what is Trump really intending to do about Syria?

Sad we are all in agreement he is a habitual liar!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So do you know for damn sure that he is not lying about raining missiles on Syria?

So do you know for damn sure that he is not lying about raining missiles on Syria?
Gee wiz I always thought this forum involved posting opinions and individual view points, hope you didn’t get your I have to be always right attitude in a bunch. Sorry buddy that’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it😬
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Gee wiz I always thought this forum involved posting opinions and individual view points, hope you didn’t get your I have to be always right attitude in a bunch. Sorry buddy that’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it😬
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Me too.

Most of the bad blood with Russia is because Russia is acting like a large Crime Family - which they are, but with nukes. This is Russia and how Russia acts for 300 years, but with Nukes

agreed.. some one should tell Trump that it was his tweet

Gee wiz I always thought this forum involved posting opinions and individual view points, hope you didn’t get your I have to be always right attitude in a bunch. Sorry buddy that’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it��
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But for Detbuch and his personal bromance with trump .. if he does send missiles raining down on Assad it will absolve him from the multitude of all his previous lie's.. in his eyes:kewl:

Wait . . . I thought it was Trump who loved the Russians . . .
I think fear might be a more appropriate word than love.

I think fear might be a more appropriate word than love.

"The 80's called, they want their foreign policy back"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But for Detbuch and his personal bromance with trump .. if he does send missiles raining down on Assad it will absolve him from the multitude of all his previous lie's.. in his eyes:kewl:

So even you, like Got Stripers, have this ability to know what others think. But, as usual, when you announce what I think, you're wrong. Your mind reading ability, actually, sucks.

I don't have a personal attraction to Trump. Although it has changed from disliking him to being neutral but unattracted. I defend him, if it can be called defending, when I think what is said is not true or unsubstantiated. And I think that scouring the universe to find something that gets him impeached or destroyed, is wrong. And, most importantly, I hope he gets the opportunity to nominate several more SCOTUS Judges.

But you're absolutely off the mark in your telepathic vision that bombing Assad will absolve Trump, in my eyes, of anything. I'm not convinced that Assad did the gassing. It doesn't make sense for him to have done that. Of course, making sense may not be part of the equation. And I don't want Assad to be deposed. What good or better would fill the void? I'd rather that we get the hell out of there.

But if Assad did the dirty deed, what should be done about it? Should the U.S., on its own, be the policeman?

And I certainly don't consider most of the stuff what you or others have called Trump's lies as lies.

I'm not convinced that Assad did the gassing. It doesn't make sense for him to have done that.
Sure it does. It helps eliminate one of the last pockets of opposition and allows Russia to stir the pot and create more pressure on the US. The risk of a response, even a coalition led response that could depose Assad is really pretty low.

There's also the scenario where the attack was carried out by the Deep State to bait Trump into war with Syria :rollem:

Sure it does. It helps eliminate one of the last pockets of opposition

It didn't need help to do that. Assad's opposition was already, to all intents and purposes, defeated. The pocket was not effective against Assad, and could have been eliminated with conventional warfare. Using the chemical weapon which is against UN and international law would stir up the international pot against Assad. It would not be an advantage for Assad, but more of an advantage for ISIS and for those fighting Assad to have the US destroy a big portion of Assad's military capability.

and allows Russia to stir the pot and create more pressure on the US. The risk of a response, even a coalition led response that could depose Assad is really pretty low.

Why would Russia want to put more pressure on the US to attack Assad and destroy his weapons and delivery systems? If Russia wanted to do that, why would it want the very thing used, a chemical weapon attack, which international opinion would be morally and legally against?

And if Russia was colluding with Trump, why would it want to pressure Trump to do something that would help bring him down?

There's also the scenario where the attack was carried out by the Deep State to bait Trump into war with Syria :rollem:

Do you have a romance with the Deep State? Have the CIA, the FBI, and the rest of them always acted honorably? Have they not illegally killed? Haven't they helped to start wars before? I don't know if Deep State had a hand in this or not. You, of course, are damn sure it didn't.

But there are other scenarios--such as ISIS using the chems to "stir up the pot" against Assad.

At any rate, I'm not with Trump on bombing Syria until there is irrefutable evidence that Assad used the chems. And if that would be the case, I'm not for the US unilaterally exacting punishment.

On the other hand, if Trump is using it as a message to NK that it could actually get the same, it might be a useful bluff in convincing Kim that he needs to cooperate. And the bluff could be swerved away from by some other "lie."

Sure it does. It helps eliminate one of the last pockets of opposition and allows Russia to stir the pot and create more pressure on the US. The risk of a response, even a coalition led response that could depose Assad is really pretty low.

If Assad is responsible for the gas attack - like his previous gas attacks, particularly since winging the documents regarding use and inventory of chem weapons, the penalty must be severe. I do not believe Russia when they say it was a false flag crap.

All that said, Syria is not wort starting WW3 over. Though keeping Russia in check - a must - will raise those risks.

There's also the scenario where the attack was carried out by the Deep State to bait Trump into war with Syria :rollem: :yawn:

I think you assume too much intelligence for Assad
It worked before
Nothing happened
I’ll do it again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It didn't need help to do that. Assad's opposition was already, to all intents and purposes, defeated. The pocket was not effective against Assad, and could have been eliminated with conventional warfare. Using the chemical weapon which is against UN and international law would stir up the international pot against Assad. It would not be an advantage for Assad, but more of an advantage for ISIS and for those fighting Assad to have the US destroy a big portion of Assad's military capability.
The advantage wasn't for Assad more likely Russia.

Why would Russia want to put more pressure on the US to attack Assad and destroy his weapons and delivery systems? If Russia wanted to do that, why would it want the very thing used, a chemical weapon attack, which international opinion would be morally and legally against?
Because their objective is to stir the pot.

And if Russia was colluding with Trump, why would it want to pressure Trump to do something that would help bring him down?
The collusion has always been about Russian interests. They are running this show.

Do you have a romance with the Deep State? Have the CIA, the FBI, and the rest of them always acted honorably? Have they not illegally killed? Haven't they helped to start wars before? I don't know if Deep State had a hand in this or not. You, of course, are damn sure it didn't.
Does the Deep State even exist? I was just quoting my Michael Flynn's son's tweet.

The advantage wasn't for Assad more likely Russia.

How is Russia advantaged?

Because their objective is to stir the pot.

There must be some deep meaning behind that.

The collusion has always been about Russian interests. They are running this show.

Russia had Syria in its hand and the rebels were basically defeated. Assad was no longer in danger. What did Russia have to gain by having Assad gas a few people?

Does the Deep State even exist? I was just quoting my Michael Flynn's son's tweet.

The term has existed for a long time. There are various but similar versions of it. Mainstream media mostly like to discredit the idea. But credible sources including those who were once part of it have written or done videos describing the phenomenon of the American Deep State, and their analyses have been pretty much in agreement. Here are two articles, the first being the shorter one, and the second being longer and more detailed:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/deep-state-america/
https://billmoyers.com/2014/02/21/anatomy-of-the-deep-state/

Peter Dale Scott's book "The American Deep State" is often cited as an excellent informative source. Sheldon Wolin talks about it. Even David Halberstam briefly mentions it in his "The Best and the Brightest."

There are some good youtube videos (the positive ones) including some by Kevin Shipp such as this (it comes in three parts):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQouKi7xDpM

The term has existed for a long time. There are various but similar versions of it. Mainstream media mostly like to discredit the idea. But credible sources including those who were once part of it have written or done videos describing the phenomenon of the American Deep State, and their analyses have been pretty much in agreement. Here are two articles, the first being the shorter one, and the second being longer and more detailed:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/deep-state-america/
https://billmoyers.com/2014/02/21/anatomy-of-the-deep-state/

Peter Dale Scott's book "The American Deep State" is often cited as an excellent informative source. Sheldon Wolin talks about it. Even David Halberstam briefly mentions it in his "The Best and the Brightest."

There are some good youtube videos (the positive ones) including some by Kevin Shipp such as this (it comes in three parts):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQouKi7xDpM



However, after he started out as a whistleblower on his own, he had major personal problems. an addiction, according to Shipp, that the CIA deliberately placed him in a contaminated house that caused all his assets to be destroyed. As a result, he sued the CIA in 2001.

he is sounding alarms about geoengineering programs, vaccines and the autism link, the 9/11 false flag terror event and how our food supply is poisoned with genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

again your source's are lets say questionable but perfect if your a conspiracy theorist

again your source's are lets say questionable but perfect if your a conspiracy theorist



pavlovian....

read this...I hope the NY Times is in your mind a less "questionable" source of conspiracy theory

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/us/politics/11secrets.html


"Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer

However, after he started out as a whistleblower on his own, he had major personal problems. an addiction, according to Shipp, that the CIA deliberately placed him in a contaminated house that caused all his assets to be destroyed. As a result, he sued the CIA in 2001.

he is sounding alarms about geoengineering programs, vaccines and the autism link, the 9/11 false flag terror event and how our food supply is poisoned with genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

again your source's are lets say questionable but perfect if your a conspiracy theorist

Again, as usual, and as so often in past replies to my posts which you tried to discredit, you misread, or didn't read, don't know, or refuse to know, and ultimately make yourself look like a small-minded, biased, or simply ignorant lackey.

I responded to Spence's asking if there was such a thing as the Deep State. It is not at all difficult to "search the archives," as Spence might say, and which he was, perhaps, too lazy to do, so I did it for him and presented two articles, a book, some other authors on the subject, and a detailed three part video explaining what is meant by the "Deep State"--these being a small sample of what is readily available on the subject.

All you could do, apparently, to deflect from a discussion on the Deep State, was pick on a tiny portion of the Video, disregarding the articles, one of which is highly detailed, and all the details in the video, which is one of three videos that it took to cover Shipp's presentation, all chock-full of detail after detail, none of which has been disputed or proven false. Most of which can be verified. And your tiny pin prick at the items in my post wasn't even on the mark.

Really, you need to do better.

Ahhh, Zeitgeist