The Trump Presidency

[Quantum Quack]

When you have quite different memories about the wishes of the US. The main military point which motivated Putin was that the turkish-backed took Idlib, which made the whole situation dangerous. The US were wishing nothing of this at all. But they were unable to say so openly, given that Putin was invited by Assad to fight islamist terrorists, including Daesh, and to support Daesh in a completely open way was impossible for the US.

Nonsense. Putin has clearly and openly declared from the start that it will fight all terrorists, and not only Daesh. This was at a time when, even if officially Al Qaida was on a list of terrorists, there was no US fighting against Al Qaida at all, and almost open support of various "moderate rebels", which were, in reality, factions of the same Al Qaida renamed into FSA or so.

There was an initial big propaganda campaign "Russia is not fighting Daesh, as they have claimed", but the natural answer was that, first, there was no such claim to fight only Daesh, and, second, they were fighting Daesh too. In fact, the first big success of the Syrian army after the Russians came was the breaking of the siege of the Kuweiris airbase, which was against Daesh. Another anti-Daesh action which became quite famous was bombing their oil business. Daesh was not the priority - initially, the priority was Latakia, because of its potential danger for the coastal area, but also because of a large amount of fighters from Caucasus there. After this, Aleppo became priority. Clearing the rural area in East Aleppo from Daesh was part of it, but of course not the main part, which was Aleppo itself. Clearing the environment of Damaskus is high priority, and will remain so for some time until the job is finished. Actually fighting Daesh is sufficiently high on the priority list. But if there are some attacks from Idlib, then to stop and revert them has clearly much higher priority. Roughly, Russia has his own priority list in Syria, and it is based on its own interests, and has never made any different claims. The US position in the UN was irrelevant.

Of course you can throw one source of propaganda at another source any time so don't waste your's or my time, but do you agree that Obama's administration first introduced a relaxing of attitude towards Assad well before the Trump administration came into office or not?

Putin was hesitant in getting involved in Syria with the USA being so severe in it's attitude towards regime change. However when the USA Obama Foreign Affairs team** suggested that the USA priority was shifting towards the defeat of Daesh, Putin had an opt in, which he took advantage of. ( that degrading Daesh was a higher priority than regime change)


**I can not recall whether it was Kerry or the UN ambassador or other.

 

[Schmelzer]

Of course you can throw one source of propaganda at another source any time so don't waste your's or my time, but do you agree that Obama's administration first introduced a relaxing of attitude towards Assad well before the Trump administration came into office or not?

I'm not aware of such a relaxing attitude. Putin was hesitant in getting involved because such a thing is always very dangerous. The reason to get involved was that the visible alternative would have been a removal of Assad simply because the pro-Assad forces became exhausted, and because the many Russian-speaking jihadists there would be too dangerous in the long term for Russia if they would get Syria as a base.

It was never a question for most of the Russian commentators that the move was, in a large part, anti-American. The reaction of at least the German establishment press (which I think is simply NATO propaganda press) was clearly negative.

I would not exclude that there were considerable variations in the Syrian policy of the US. Such variations, as well as even conflicts between various parts of the Obama government (Kerry vs. Pentagon vs. CIA) have been seen and discussed by Russian observers too. Even Putin himself has, at least implicitly, referred to them: When asked about the elections, part of his answer was that he hopes that it will be possible to make some agreements with the new administration - which was interpreted as a hint that it is impossible to have agreements with the Obama administration because they are sabotaged by other parts. So, there may have been, among the many variations, also some relaxations. But what I seriously doubt is your thesis that such relaxations would have been the base for Putin doing something.

 

[douwd20]

Drip drip drip

The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladimir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials.

Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel​

 

[Quantum Quack]

I'm not aware of such a relaxing attitude. Putin was hesitant in getting involved because such a thing is always very dangerous. The reason to get involved was that the visible alternative would have been a removal of Assad simply because the pro-Assad forces became exhausted, and because the many Russian-speaking jihadists there would be too dangerous in the long term for Russia if they would get Syria as a base.

It was never a question for most of the Russian commentators that the move was, in a large part, anti-American. The reaction of at least the German establishment press (which I think is simply NATO propaganda press) was clearly negative.

I would not exclude that there were considerable variations in the Syrian policy of the US. Such variations, as well as even conflicts between various parts of the Obama government (Kerry vs. Pentagon vs. CIA) have been seen and discussed by Russian observers too. Even Putin himself has, at least implicitly, referred to them: When asked about the elections, part of his answer was that he hopes that it will be possible to make some agreements with the new administration - which was interpreted as a hint that it is impossible to have agreements with the Obama administration because they are sabotaged by other parts. So, there may have been, among the many variations, also some relaxations. But what I seriously doubt is your thesis that such relaxations would have been the base for Putin doing something.

Now with the "supposed" bombing in St Petersburg and conspiracy theories running rampant about red flags and fake news and anti corruption protesters mass arrests etc... Putin may find out what happens when he screws over his own credibility and how his own abuse of information against others can turn against him...

 

[joepistole]

Putin was hesitant in getting involved because such a thing is always very dangerous. The reason to get involved was that the visible alternative would have been a removal of Assad simply because the pro-Assad forces became exhausted, and because the many Russian-speaking jihadists there would be too dangerous in the long term for Russia if they would get Syria as a base.

Please! Putin creamed his pants. He couldn't wait to get into Syria. Just as he couldn't wait to get into Ukraine and Georgia before.

It was never a question for most of the Russian commentators that the move was, in a large part, anti-American. The reaction of at least the German establishment press (which I think is simply NATO propaganda press) was clearly negative.

I would not exclude that there were considerable variations in the Syrian policy of the US. Such variations, as well as even conflicts between various parts of the Obama government (Kerry vs. Pentagon vs. CIA) have been seen and discussed by Russian observers too. Even Putin himself has, at least implicitly, referred to them: When asked about the elections, part of his answer was that he hopes that it will be possible to make some agreements with the new administration - which was interpreted as a hint that it is impossible to have agreements with the Obama administration because they are sabotaged by other parts. So, there may have been, among the many variations, also some relaxations. But what I seriously doubt is your thesis that such relaxations would have been the base for Putin doing something.

Who do you think you are fooling comrade? Is your Syrian thread getting a bit dull? Are you tired of spamming your own thread? How are your pro Russian Syrian posts relevant to this thread?

 

[Quantum Quack]

because the many Russian-speaking jihadists there would be too dangerous in the long term for Russia if they would get Syria as a base.

of course they can strike from any where .... crazy to think other wise... (eg. Russian speaking Jihadists using St Petersburg as a base....)

 

[iceaura]

Nonsense. Putin has clearly and openly declared from the start that it will fight all terrorists, and not only Daesh.

Assad has been continually guilty of State terrorism for years now. So Putin's missing at least one.

 

[joepistole]

Trump's financial sponsors, the Mercer's, are spending millions of dollars to prop up Trump's presidency. That, like everything else with Trump, is unprecedented. It's kinda early to be needing a bailout. But with a job approval rating of 35% the need is undeniable. At this rate Trump is well on his way to bankrupting the Mercers.

 

[Schmelzer]

Assad has been continually guilty of State terrorism for years now. So Putin's missing at least one.

Of course, Putin does not use the American way to justify aggression against sovereign states - to use propaganda against the government of that state, and then to attack the "evil" government.

of course they can strike from any where .... crazy to think other wise... (eg. Russian speaking Jihadists using St Petersburg as a base....)

Of course, but it is one thing to have a whole state, or at least a whole territory controlled by own armed forces, and another one to have to hide completely.

How are your pro Russian Syrian posts relevant to this thread?

The point which is relevant for this thread is that Trump has clarified that "Assad must go" is no longer a priority of the US. Which is all what I have discussed in #1056. If you think mentioning Putin here is off-topic, pretenses to Quantum Quack, who has started this in #1058

 

[iceaura]

Of course, Putin does not use the American way to justify aggression against sovereign states - to use propaganda against the government of that state, and then to attack the "evil" government.

So his excuse of combatting terrorism is bs - he's defending one of the primary terrorists in Syria, and in the region as a whole.

The point which is relevant for this thread is that Trump has clarified that "Assad must go" is no longer a priority of the US.

Are you still paying attention to what that guy says?

"Get their oil and trade it in dollars" is still on the leaderboard, though.

Trump's advocating for a large increase in the military budget of the US. We all know what fascists tend to do with extra military capacity, and in this case the US is already deployed into Syria. Also, Trump has financial connections in the area - plus he can be helping Putin out in the great Russian effort against a selection of terrorists, none of them State agents.

 

[origin]

I thinking is kinda cool that we have our very own fake news Russian.

It makes me feel special....

 

[Quantum Quack]

The point which is relevant for this thread is that Trump has clarified that "Assad must go" is no longer a priority of the US. Which is all what I have discussed in #1056. If you think mentioning Putin here is off-topic, pretenses to Quantum Quack, who has started this in #1058

From the point of view of the anti-globalist camp, there seems to be another sign of some change in foreign policy in comparison with the Obama administration. It was said that "Assad must go" is no longer the priority of US policy in Syria.

I was just correcting what I thought was a relatively minor mistake about your comparisons between the Obama and Trump administrations. Trump has indeed repeated and clarified what the Obama administration had already suggested.
That "Assad must go" was no longer a major condition to forming an alliance against ISIL thus demonstrating a flexibility not seen very often in USA foreign policy due to the urgent need to tackle the Daesh problem.

 

[Schmelzer]

So his excuse of combatting terrorism is bs - he's defending one of the primary terrorists in Syria, and in the region as a whole.

Nonsense. What he is combatting is terrorism. That he does not combat all those which you name terrorists does not mean that Daesh, Al Qaida and their friends are not terrorists.

And if you want to talk about state terrorism, Putin is also fighting the main state terrorist of the whole world, which is the US.

Are you still paying attention to what that guy says?

I'm used to pay attention also to unreliable sources. I'm even paying some attention to what you say.

Trump's advocating for a large increase in the military budget of the US.

We will see if this is dangerous or not. Even with the actual budget one can do a lot of horrible things, simply by giving it to the CIA. If one, instead, starts further improvements of F35, the harm is not that big.

That "Assad must go" was no longer a major condition to forming an alliance against ISIL thus demonstrating a flexibility not seen very often in USA foreign policy due to the urgent need to tackle the Daesh problem.

There was no alliance between US and Russia agains Daesh. And there is none yet. And Daesh was not at all a problem for the US.

 

[iceaura]

Nonsense. What he is combatting is terrorism. That he does not combat all those which you name terrorists does not mean that Daesh, Al Qaida and their friends are not terrorists

Seems like he is defending the primary and most powerful source of terrorism in Syria, against not only other rival terrorists but also non-terrorist rebels against Assad's regime.

"Trump's advocating for a large increase in the military budget of the US."
We will see if this is dangerous or not.

Better to have foreseen - it's too late now. We may be able to neutralize or remove him, but the odds are against it - he's probably going to be your problem in a bit. ("Get their oil and trade it in dollars" is still on the leaderboard).

And if you want to talk about state terrorism, Putin is also fighting the main state terrorist of the whole world, which is the US.

So the State terrorism of Assad is ok, but the State terrorism of the US is not. Seems a bit tricky - especially with a short-horizon bully Russian-installed as CEO of the US.

 

[Quantum Quack]

There was no alliance between US and Russia agains Daesh. And there is none yet.

You really do have a major comprehension/translation problem eh? I wrote that the main condition for the forming of an alliance was relaxed. Where did I write that an alliance had been formed?
You may think it trivial and nonsense but these small but important differences in your interpretation make a huge difference to what you are in turn stating and therefore what you are understanding.

And Daesh was not at all a problem for the US.

Try telling that to the Trump anti Islamic extremist team. If Daesh were not , they certainly are now...

 

[Quantum Quack]

English lessons:
"Trump anti Islamic extremist team" can be interpreted two ways... which one was intended do you think?

 

[Schmelzer]

Anti-Assad propaganda disposed.

So the State terrorism of Assad is ok, but the State terrorism of the US is not. Seems a bit tricky - especially with a short-horizon bully Russian-installed as CEO of the US.

The question is one of less evil. US state terrorism endangers the whole world and leads to wars in a lot of different countries. The victims of Syrian state terrorism are only Syrians, and only those among them who want to overthrow the government. And, moreover, it is far from clear which part of Syrian state terrorism is reality and which is Western propaganda fake.

The "Russian-installed" Trump is a good joke, the Russians have laughed a little bit, but that's all. It is not even clear if Putin has preferred Trump, several pro-Russian commentators have argued that Clinton would have been less evil for Russia (because this would have been simply more of the same failed anti-Russian strategy). The choice of your elections was about less evil too, and above candidates were obviously evil.

Anyway, it looks like Trump is already rolling back and reviving "Assad must go".

You really do have a major comprehension/translation problem eh? I wrote that the main condition for the forming of an alliance was relaxed. Where did I write that an alliance had been formed?

Sorry for such a misunderstanding. In this case, what was the point of your following remark?

Putin was hesitant in getting involved in Syria with the USA being so severe in it's attitude towards regime change. However when the USA Obama Foreign Affairs team** suggested that the USA priority was shifting towards the defeat of Daesh, Putin had an opt in, which he took advantage of.

Whatever, given you admit now that there was nothing like an anti-Daesh alliance between Russia and US, this makes no sense. There was no opt-in for Putin, the whole action was clearly anti-American.

Try telling that to the Trump anti Islamic extremist team. If Daesh were not , they certainly are now...

They already know that Daesh was never a problem for Obama. Trump has made even more radical claims: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...error-army-names-crooked-Hillary-founder.html

 

[iceaura]

Anti-Assad propaganda disposed.

No anti-Assad propaganda present. He's the strongman head of a moderately terrorist State, complete with torture prisons and so forth.

And, moreover, it is far from clear which part of Syrian state terrorism is reality and which is Western propaganda fake.

It's clear that the part involving US outsourcing of "rendition" victims - essentially borrowing Syria's State prisons as a black site - by W&Cheney's administration, involved no special infrastructure or unusual changes in ordinary procedure on the part of the Syrian government. Start there.

The "Russian-installed" Trump is a good joke, the Russians have laughed a little bit, but that's all. It is not even clear if Putin has preferred Trump,

Here's hoping its still a good joke after he gets his military budget,
and that the years-long Russian efforts to damage his political foes and improve his political fortunes don't kind of - you know - backfire. It's happened before, to Russia, underestimating Western fascists with armies. You don't seem to have much of an idea what a guy like Trump can do, here.
You fools have put a banana republic fascist in charge of the US military. Do you think his incompetence, corruption, destruction of American political infrastructure and the like, will lessen the abuse of American military power? Will make the bad guys in the CIA and all the rest less of a threat to the world? Apparently you are counting on the rest of the American governing apparatus, plus the decency and stability and self-interest of the American people, to keep things on an even keel here.
A German proverb for you: "Too clever is dumb".
An American take: If you give a shotgun to a chimp, the holes in your ceiling are your fault.

The choice of your elections was about less evil too, and above candidates were obviously evil.
- - - -
Anyway, it looks like Trump is already rolling back and reviving "Assad must go".
- - -
They already know that Daesh was never a problem for Obama. Trump has made even more radical claims:

Still living in your dream - the illusion you can filter information from American propaganda, and Trump - along with the rest of his administration, and backed by the Republican Party - is some kind of businessman candidate with politics and an ideology and so forth, a regular politician you can balance off and find to be a lesser evil.

Here's a rule of thumb for handling Trump tweets, speeches, etc: Whatever bad stuff he or his supporting media yak accuses Clinton or Obama or any of the rightwing's designated evils of doing, is something he or his backers have done, are doing, or plan to do.

It's not universally true - but it will improve your forecasting abilities enormously.

 

[Schmelzer]

It's clear that the part involving US outsourcing of "rendition" victims - essentially borrowing Syria's State prisons as a black site - by W&Cheney's administration, involved no special infrastructure or unusual changes in ordinary procedure on the part of the Syrian government.

Fine. If you don't have more, I have no problem if you name as US, as Syria terrorist states.

Here's hoping its still a good joke after he gets his military budget, and that the years-long Russian efforts to damage his political foes and improve his political fortunes don't kind of - you know - backfire. It's happened before, to Russia, underestimating Western fascists with armies. You don't seem to have much of an idea what a guy like Trump can do, here.

First, I know very well that as Trump, as Obama, as every president of the US during the last 50 years can destroy most of the world. Then, the "Russian effort" is a democrats fantasy, with no more than some Russian media which have favored Trump based on his election rhetoric as the background. My position was war criminal vs. unknown, and in such a situation unknown looks less evil.

You fools have put a banana republic fascist in charge of the US military. Do you think his incompetence, corruption, destruction of American political infrastructure and the like, will lessen the abuse of American military power?

I have not done anything, because I'm not a US citizen to elect somebody in US elections. I think that "incompetence, corruption, destruction of American political infrastructure and the like" will weaken the US government, and this is good news for the rest of the world, and for most American people too. Of course, the US will remain strong enough to destroy the world.

Cheap polemical nonsense disposed.

 

[joepistole]

Trump discovered Assad is a bad guy today. Just days after cozying up to Assad, Trump appears to have done another 180. He learned Assad bombs innocent men, women, and children with chemical weapons. What a discovery! The world has known this for years. It hasn't been a secret. This was Obama's whole red line gig.

The education of Trump. How could such an ignorant man get elected? Thank you Electoral College. Now, Baby Bush was pretty damn stupid, but the Trumper, well, he's dumb on steroids. He's a very slow learner.