Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/index.php)

- Political Threads (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/forumdisplay.php?f=66)

- - Who 1st (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/showthread.php?t=96624)

President Donald Trump says he did not sanction Chinese officials further over the detention of Muslims in Xinjiang as he was in the "middle of a trade deal".

Mr Trump told the Axios news site that achieving a "great" deal meant he could not impose "additional sanctions".

World Leadership at it finest :fury:

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1195643)

I supposed he could have sent some planeloads of cash to get them to behave :rotf2:

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1195645)

I supposed he could have sent some planeloads of cash to get them to behave :rotf2:

Still pushing fake news
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seriously,
It all fit on one plane

Mattis had a lot of criticism for Obama putting a blind eye to Iran to put through that horrible, miserable, terrible Iran Nuclear Deal.

Hard to say who he dislikes more, Obama or Trump. Now add Joe Biden to this - or worse 4 motnhs in when Joe is drooling on himself, some VP that is picked due to being female and black, like Stacey Abrams, rather than due to competence. (I think Condi is super-competent but wrong party and Harris won't get it but is marginally competent at this stage - BOTH are more competent than Joe)

So we will have at least three, and good argument can be made for FIVE, lousy Presidents in a row. Great Fcking Job, people.

So the point is Obama looked the other way on a LOT of bad #^&#^&#^&#^& with Iran (and Russia and China for the matter) for bad deals.

Maybe Trump will have more flexibility after the election.

Quote:

James Mattis’s Blistering Criticism of Obama

September 4, 2019 1:25 PM

James Mattis (Reuters/Eric Thayer)

He is mum on Trump but skewers Obama for taking a wrecking ball to American prestige and power.

Most of the coverage of James Mattis’s new book, Call Sign Chaos, co-authored with Bing West, deals with the former defense secretary’s relationship with President Trump. The Atlantic‘s pre-publication interview with Mattis was headlined, “The Man Who Couldn’t Take It Anymore.” The New York Times editorial page ran a column about Mattis called “The Man Trump Wishes He Were.”

Both articles establish that Mattis doesn’t have much to say right now, in either the book or in interviews, about President Trump. Neither piece, though, mentions another president about whom Mattis is more than willing to dish. That would be Barack Obama, who was Mattis’s commander in chief when the then–Marine general led Central Command. Mattis’s critique of Obama isn’t just harsh. It’s blistering.

Mattis’s tenure at Central Command lasted from 2010 to 2013. It was during this time that the Obama administration took steps that diminished American influence in the greater Middle East and empowered Iran. The spillover effect includes the migrant crisis that contributed to the rise of national populism in Europe. Mattis dissented from Obama policy. “In 2010,” he writes, “I argued strongly against pulling all our troops out of Iraq.”

When the Arab Spring came to Egypt in 2011, “I thought we should use quiet diplomacy to urge inclusive government.” Obama instead called for Hosni Mubarak to resign. Mattis writes:

President Obama came out vocally against Mubarak, insisting that in Egypt, “we were on the right side of history.” Having read a bit of history and found that events, good and bad, had been “written” by both good and evil characters, I put little stock in the idea that history books yet to be written would somehow give yearning Arabs what they fervently desired today.

In the spring of 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador on U.S. soil. Mattis urged the White House to make the public case for reprisals against Tehran. He was rebuffed. “We treated an act of war as a law enforcement violation, jailing the low level courier.”

Through it all, Mattis was dealing with Iran’s malign behavior across the region. “Each step along the way, I argued for political clarity and offered options that gave the Commander in Chief a rheostat he could dial up or down to protect our nation.” The commander in chief wasn’t interested. He turned the rheostat off.
60

Mattis was informed he would be relieved of command in December 2012. He writes:

I was leaving a region aflame and in disarray. The lack of an integrated regional strategy had left us adrift, and our friends confused. We were offering no leadership or direction. I left my post deeply disturbed that we had shaken our friends’ confidence and created vacuums that our adversaries would exploit.

The following year, Barack Obama failed to enforce his “red line” against Syrian dictator Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons against civilians. “This was a shot not heard around the world,” Mattis writes. He continues:

Old friends in NATO and in the Pacific registered dismay and incredulity that America’s reputation had been seriously weakened as a credible security partner. Within thirty-six hours, I received a phone call from a friendly Pacific-nation diplomat. “Well, Jim,” he said, “I guess we’re on our own with China.”

Americans will have to wait for Mattis’s full assessment of the Trump presidency. We were provided some clues in his resignation letter. It has also been reported that Mattis left over differences with the president regarding troop deployments in Syria and the potential abandonment of U.S. partners there.

In the meantime, at this very moment, we have Mattis’s devastating assessment of Barack Obama’s foreign policy and its calamitous effects on American prestige and American power. Maybe we ought to pay attention?

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...cism-of-obama/

Meanwhile in the present, where the current occupant of the WH interferes in the prosecution of Halkbank for laundering Iranian funds, gives up Syria and the Kurds, threatens numerous NATO partners, both denies and asks for foreign interference in our elections and supports the illegal annexation of the West Bank.
And you are hoping for flexibility, while Detbuch will claim it is all a joke.

Iran and Turkey are increasingly coordinating policies across the Middle East as they work together on several issues. Their relationship has grown as both oppose the US role in Syria, and they have other common interests, such as trade to get around US sanctions and to fight Kurdish dissident groups. In general this is a partly cynical policy of trade offs, but there is also unity in their support for Hamas and also their antipathy towards Israel, which may bring Tehran and Ankara increasingly close on issues across the Middle East, from Yemen to Syria.
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif went to Turkey on June 15, one of the most high level meetings he has had during the Covid-19 pandemic. His agenda was clear: He wants Turkey to aid with sanctions relief and an arms embargo. To increase trade Iran will aid Turkey on several files. That included Iran voicing support for Turkey’s role in Libya. Turkey has recruited Syrian rebels to fight in Libya so Ankara can secure energy drilling rights off the coast. Turkey has sent drones and arms to Libya to support the government in Tripoli against the opposition. Egypt, supported by Saudi Arabia and other countries, has threatened to intervene to balance Turkey’s role. France and Turkey have clashed over Libya as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1195748)

Mattis never said he was a Threat to the Constitution..

Once again the 2 are not remotely similar
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1195748)

Mattis had a lot of criticism for Obama putting a blind eye to Iran to put through that horrible, miserable, terrible Iran Nuclear Deal.

Yea, he really blasted it in the Senate Arms Services Committee testimony a few years back :1poke:

Quote:

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1195763)

Yea, he really blasted it in the Senate Arms Services Committee testimony a few years back :1poke:

You must mean when he said he "yes, I do" when asked if he thought the deal was in "our national security interest" and also said Trump should consider sticking with it. I guess the faux news outlets had a different spin on that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1195761)

Mattis never said he was a Threat to the Constitution..

Once again the 2 are not remotely similar
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Then give us a better option.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1195779)

Then give us a better option.

Anyone else but Trump

At this point Pence would be a vast improvement
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1195838)

Anyone else but Trump

At this point Pence would be a vast improvement
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yes trump and/or pence still better than bidenpelosischumer

Putin's Puppet can't do anything to disrupt his Russian election aid and Putin should come to the G7

American intelligence officials have concluded that a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan — including targeting American troops — amid the peace talks to end the long-running war there.

The intelligence finding was briefed to President Trump, and the White House’s National Security Council discussed the problem at an interagency meeting in late March, the officials said. Officials developed a menu of potential options — starting with making a diplomatic complaint to Moscow and a demand that it stop, along with an escalating series of sanctions and other possible responses, but the White House has yet to authorize any step, the officials said.

Now do a But Obama