The Trump Presidency

Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems most likely that Pakistan got nuclear weapons(or at least the blueprints and materials) from China who, at the time, considered India a threat.
Pakistan then, most likely, supported Islamic terrorism as a reserve force should they need to fight India.

The political situation there seems to be rather machiavellian on a clear day, mostly, however it seems cloudy to foggy.

A few years ago, a friend pointed out that we had a military presence in Iraq and in Afghanistan which, most likely not coincidentally, bracketed Iran. Also machiavellian.

It seems that the globalist elites have been playing a covert game which may or may not serve the best interests of the people and electorate in/of this country.

Do they take their orders from Israel or Saudi Arabia?
 
Last edited:
Bells said:
There's no "perhaps" about it.

It's the same reason India and Pakistan both developed nuclear weapons.


Who is ignoring it?

I pointed out why Iran wants nuclear weapons. You decided to apply something I never even discussed or said, to me.

Israel's aggression is part of the reason why Iran wants nuclear weapons. Something something about circular firing squad goes here, I suppose.


Oookay...

And?

The more Israel threatens, the more likely Iran will develop or acquire nuclear weapons. And if they do, then Israel would be risking self destruction if they decide to nuke or attack Iran without provocation.


I don't even know why you are asking such a question....

Anywho..

Israel would be insane to attack a nuclear armed Iran. Iran is not stupid. They aren't going to attack Israel. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for Israel.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with any thing you have written...
except,
The question being addressed was about Middle Eastern stability and how that would deteriorate if Iran restarted it's nuke development program.
It's a no brainer... obvious etc.

Also I wish to amend and correct a position I had published taken in post
Quantum Quack said:
Further and my last post on the subject...(in this thread)
If sectarian war between Iran and the Saudi occurs (which is likely due to alleged Iranian support in Yemen), the Saudi would be obliged to close it's borders to those non Sunni, seeking to make the pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, both of which the Saudi's have control over.
To any Shia Muslim this would automatically incite enormous violence and aggression.
Perhaps talking about any nuclear detente becomes obsolete under such circumstances given the enormous pride and passion of the various sects.
Click to expand...
I asked a Sunni Muslim friend who works in law enforcement here to clarify this potential in Saudi Arabia regarding the holy sites. Mecca - Medina.

He stated that extreme vetting of Shia Muslim is already in place, and that essentially blocking pilgrim access by closing of borders would not necessarily lead to catastrophic outcomes, as heavy restrictions have been in place for a long time. In the event of a Saudi/Iranian conflict the closing of borders would be a minor change to the current status quo. My friends comments have a certain credibility but need further verification.
 
Last edited:
Quantum Quack said:
I have no problem with any thing you have written...
except,
The question being addressed was about Middle Eastern stability and how that would deteriorate if Iran restarted it's nuke development program.
It's a no brainer... obvious etc.
Click to expand...
And you missed the obvious answer.

Middle Eastern stability has already deteriorated to the point where countries like Iran would seek nuclear weapons, because Israel has nuclear weapons and because the US now has every appearance of opening the pathway to allow Saudi Arabia to developing or acquiring them.

Understand now?

Israel having a nuclear stockpile already destabilised the region immensely. Iran's desire for nuclear weapons to act as a deterrent towards a nuclear armed Israel is Iran's natural reaction against a hostile ME and Israel.

If Trump fails to ensure safeguards and commitments from the Saudi's in regards to their nuclear program, then Iran's position and desire to acquire or develop nuclear weapons will become even greater.

It's not Iran developing or acquiring nuclear arms that will destabilise the ME. It is their not acquiring them as others do, that will cause further destabilisation.

The answer is to disarm Israel of its nuclear stockpile and limit the development of nuclear weapons in the region for all countries. But that won't happen.

Quantum Quack said:
I asked a Sunni Muslim friend who works in law enforcement here to clarify this potential in Saudi Arabia regarding the holy sites. Mecca - Medina.

He stated that extreme vetting of Shia Muslim is already in place, and that essentially blocking pilgrim access by closing of borders would not necessarily lead to catastrophic outcomes, as heavy restrictions have been in place for a long time. In the event of a Saudi/Iranian conflict the closing of borders would be a minor change to the current status quo. My friends comments have a certain credibility but need further verification.
Click to expand...
You're joking, right?

Did you ask him this before or after 1987?
 
Bells said:
And you missed the obvious answer.

Middle Eastern stability has already deteriorated to the point where countries like Iran would seek nuclear weapons, because Israel has nuclear weapons and because the US now has every appearance of opening the pathway to allow Saudi Arabia to developing or acquiring them.

Understand now?

Israel having a nuclear stockpile already destabilised the region immensely. Iran's desire for nuclear weapons to act as a deterrent towards a nuclear armed Israel is Iran's natural reaction against a hostile ME and Israel.

If Trump fails to ensure safeguards and commitments from the Saudi's in regards to their nuclear program, then Iran's position and desire to acquire or develop nuclear weapons will become even greater.

It's not Iran developing or acquiring nuclear arms that will destabilise the ME. It is their not acquiring them as others do, that will cause further destabilisation.

The answer is to disarm Israel of its nuclear stockpile and limit the development of nuclear weapons in the region for all countries. But that won't happen.


You're joking, right?

Did you ask him this before or after 1987?
Click to expand...
If you thought things are unstable now, all I can say is that IMO, because of Trumps confrontational style, " You ain't seen nothin' yet!"
 
As regards the OP:

In the media a bunch of people appear to have suddenly noticed - as if it were new - that Trump may simply withhold funds from the initiatives in the budget he doesn't like. Nixon did that. It's sort of quasi legal, but since Nixon it's been very rare - until Trump. Trump has made such unilateral refusal to execute Congressional mandates and laws almost routine - he delayed imposing Congressionally mandated sanctions against Russia for a year (allowing his Russian backers time to reallocate their money), he refused to spend the money Congress appropriated for handling Russian cyber attacks on US elections (120 million, it's still waiting on the books afaik), and so forth.

So it's possible the Dems simply got taken, again - a budget "compromise" in which they get none of what was promised and agreed.
 
http://lancemannion.typepad.com/lan...t-and-the-nattering-nabobs-of-negativism.html
The reason I’m stating the obvious is that while I believe the journalists who covered the election know this about Nixon and even know about Agnew if they don’t actually remember him, the implications didn’t sink in.
- - - - -
- - - I think they couldn’t believe that the American people would actually elect an obvious cheap hustler and con man like Trump president. I think some of them still can’t wrap their heads around it and keep looking for signs that it didn’t happen and Trump is something and someone he’s not.
- - -
But there was Agnew. There was Nixon. There was Warren G. Harding and Albert B. Fall. There were I lost count of all those members of the Reagan Administration. There were Mayor Daley and Big Bill Thompson and Jimmy Walker and how many other Governors and mayors of big cities and small towns. Agnew was Governor of Maryland! And you could fill both houses of the Congress with past Representatives and Senators who’ve gone to jail or been indicted or left office before the office could catch up with them. - - -
Click to expand...

Guy makes the comparison between Trump and not Nixon but Agnew. His impetus was the latest perfidy of Scott Pruitt, whose comparative competence at getting done what he wants done in his job makes him the most damaging of Trump's appointees to date.

And since what Pruitt wants done is enabling rich Republican bastards to make lots more money without interference from government agencies or oversight, and since while he's doing that he enjoys taking advantage of opportunities to provide himself with luxuries and fun stuff on the embezzled taxpayer's dime as well as the influence buyer's expense account, the comparison with Agnew is appropriate;

and since the governor of Kentucky recently cribbed from a speech by Agnew to praise Pruitt, it's timely. https://twitter.com/GovMattBevin/status/981497188042895360
 
Between the Southern District of New York issuing warrants for the FBI to raid Michael Cohen's offices or President Trump's response from the Cabinet Room, well, today is today.
 
iceaura said:
There are no sprinkler systems on the residential floors.
This isn't the first fire in that tower.
It could well be chance.
Click to expand...
true!
We shall see what the Fire department, police have to say once they have carried out their investigation, I guess...
one dead, entire apartment ablaze, highly suggestive of an accelerant being used.
even if so, there is nothing other than circumstantial timing to suggest a relationship to Trump and pure chance is surely the case. Or is it?
 
#swampstank | #WhatTheyVotedFor​

​

And then there's also the bit with the Ukranian steel magnate; apparently that was last month's subpoenas, but the news about Victor Pinchuk might have gotten lost in the noise:

Investigators subpoenaed the Trump Organization this year for an array of records about business with foreign nationals. In response, the company handed over documents about a $150,000 donation that the Ukrainian billionaire, Victor Pinchuk, made in September 2015 to the Donald J. Trump Foundation in exchange for a 20-minute appearance by Mr. Trump that month through a video link to a conference in Kiev.

Michael D. Cohen, the president's personal lawyer whose office and hotel room were raided on Monday in an apparently unrelated case, solicited the donation. The contribution from Mr. Pinchuk, who has sought closer ties for Ukraine to the West, was the largest the foundation received in 2015 from anyone besides Mr. Trump himself.

(Schmidt and Haberman↱)​

The fact that Donald Trump was elected says any number of things about our society. The fact that he remains president only underscores the point.

Perhaps the most striking thing about it all is how bad they are at it. Consider the easy recitation↑ from Emma Goldman↑ about patriotism and the wealthy; the one part I can believe is that they really don't recognize what they are doing wrong because, being rich and expecting to be able to settle in and do what they do wherever they land, Trump and other such businessmen never really thought about what would happen if it all caught up with them because, really, it seems rather quite hard to conceive of why they would expect the culture to rally up and try to take a bunch of it back. Being rich enough to not care about consequences would have an appearance of allowing or encouraging one to slip out of the habit of considering consequences.
____________________

Notes:

Schmidt, Michael S., and Maggie Haberman. "Mueller Investigating Ukrainian's $150,000 Payment for a Trump Appearance". The New York Times. 9 April 2018. NYTimes.com. 10 April 2018. https://nyti.ms/2GQwnLF
 
"It's a disgraceful situation. It's a total witch hunt," Trump said on Monday.

830a4-trumpwitchevil.jpg
 
Schmelzer said:
Sounds like America wants to go to war over that fake gas attack. http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/04/09/tucker-syrian-gas-attacks-civilians-dont-jump-war-conclusion
Click to expand...
Should know with in 24 hours I think...
For some reason yet to be fully disclosed, there has been a huge campaign to discredit any remaining semblance of honesty, truth, good faith, between Russia and the rest of the world.
I guess the cost for a litany of historical lying and deceptions is about to be revealed.
Evidence based reasoning is only available and valid if the evidence is believed and trusted.
 
You may have probably noticed recently a significant shift in Trumps attitude toward Putin.

Perhaps the Mueller investigation has revealed more than any one could have expected?
Beyond it's original brief and beyond just Trump/Putin campaign collusion implications.
 
sculptor said:
I sincerely hope that Trump is smart enough to see through this insane propaganda.
Click to expand...
Oh man.
How in hell does that guy hide in plain sight?
Look: it doesn't make any difference whether Trump can "see through" anything. He has no interest in it. He doesn't care one way or the other about gas attacks or who is behind them. Whether or not he expands the US wars in the Middle East - which he has already bumped up, with drones and the like - to include some kind of confrontation in Syria, will depend on factors personal to him, not matters of US foreign policy or governance.
 
Schmelzer said:
Sounds like America wants to go to war over that fake gas attack
Click to expand...
Trump is probably looking for war, but that may not be his best opportunity. The Republican Party is of course eager for any war, but their Commander In Chief has his own agenda and his own vulnerabilities.

My first guess is that somebody took Trump seriously when he said he wanted to pull out of Syria altogether, and is acting to make that more difficult.
 
just have a look at the list of recent extraordinary events:
  1. Nerve agent attack in UK - Russia blamed no one killed
    1. Why is the death toll so low?
      According to reports the nerve agent was well spread and extremely toxic yet not one single fatality when there should have been 1000's.
  1. 100's Russian diplomatic staff expelled with international collusion in a coordinated fashion.
  2. Chemical weapons attack in Syria - Syria/Russia blamed - video footage is inconclusive IMO est. only 40 deaths.
      1. Given the amount of bombing and destruction involved in Syria why only 40 dead when one would intuitively anticipate much more significant numbers. Perhaps to scare the rebels into surrendering. A token gesture maybe. A very dangerous token gesture yes?
      2. Why would Assad risk American wrath when he doesn't need to?
  3. Missile strike on Syrian/Russian air base only 14 killed (11 Iranians 3 Syrians) - Israel blamed by Russia, Iran and Syria.
      1. If Israel was the source of the missiles, it appears that they were primarily targeting Iranian nationals in specific buildings and not military assets like planes and hangers etc. A typical preemptive Israel action based on intell we are not privy to.
  4. Daughter and father recovered in hospital after UK nerve agent attack.
      1. No doubt they have much to say...or do they?
  5. Trump gives 48 hour deadline for a decision.
  6. Trump abandons planned trip to meet Americans in Peru
What stands out for me the most though is the fact that overall the death toll has been so low.

In among all the above, Trump ill-advisedly announces a possible withdrawal of USA boots from the Middles East

You will also notice that the attention of the world has shifted rapidly to the alleged chemical attack and away from the missile attack on the Syrian air base.


Opinion:
I believe the world is being baited into war and while it would be easy to point the finger at Israel, at this point, it has to be mentioned that Israel would be one of the greatest losers if major war was to take place.

The world is being played (including the remaining rebels in Syria). Just don't yet know by who. It stinks of corporate amateurism.
Keeping in mind that the associated death toll is so low.
 
Last edited:
note: Both USA and Russian military industrial giants benefit enormously from global conflict as long as it doesn't go nuclear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top