Vast efforts to portray Donald Trump as Vladimir Putin’s flunky have given Trump huge incentives to prove otherwise. Last Thursday, he began the process in a big way by ordering a missile attack on Russia’s close ally Syria. In the aftermath of the attack, the cheerleading from U.S. mass media was close to unanimous, and the assault won lots of praise on Capitol Hill. Finally, the protracted and fervent depictions of Trump as a Kremlin tool were getting some tangible results.
I think the majority of commenters here at CD have been saying all along that the new McCarthyism would lead to no good at all.
The neocons in both parties are in charge; if the ruling class want something in this world, they'll do whatever it takes. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/trumps_wag_the_dog_moment_20170409 and https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/08/where-was-cias-pompeo-on-syria/
Any war that takes a graph like the one at
to explain it, can't be good.
The deep seated identification many people in the US have with military power, the way they feel that being part of "the strongest mightiest nation on earth" adds something to their sense of self is a dangerous and to people like me who don't share the feeling unattractive cultural trait.
President Trump has now demonstrated to himself the real story of the US presidency: it can prove itself unable to get its domestic agenda enacted, be unable to fulfill the campaign promises that were made, but the role of Commander In Chief with the entirety of the armed services there to obey orders is the best part of the job.
The unintended negative consequences of military actions -- the "blowback" -- don't always show up right away unlike the national cheerleading that appears immediately.
The fact that doing anything military is playing thermonuclear Russian roulette doesn't seem to register in the hearts and minds of the fans of Team MIC. The feeling of vicarious empowerment blots out all awareness of the downsides of acting out with missiles in the air and/or boots on the ground such as death and other forms of collateral damage.
Let's make it real simple: every one of these organisations depends upon the US taxpayer for its support. Without US assistance the militias terrorising the region would disappear tomorrow
Solomon is a twit, Theodore. Criticizing putin, or trump himself, is not some excuse for bombing anything. That "progressives" would offer it is absurd, but not unexpected.
When I talk to my friends about the possibility of nuclear war, and how we should be very reticent to create an anti-Russia atmosphere, they all simply say that there will not be a nuclear war, that the leaders are not that crazy.
It amazes me that they're so confident about that!
Calling Solomon a "twit" may feel good to you for the moment, but I think it pretty much ruins any chances you have of bringing people over to your way of thinking.
We definitely need an Umpire, to call this Empire 'Out!'
What ruins chances of bringing people over to ones way of thinking is projecting motives of "peace" onto an erratic conman then blaming the folks who recognized the stupidity of doing that from the get-go for the problems created by one's own intellectual naivety.
I do not know if it is true or not, because all governments lie, but according to Russian news, Russia has nukes on trigger alert aimed at the White House and the Pentagon. But if true, doesn't Trump realize that he is just as vulnerable as the rest of us? bunkers will not protect Trump and his family from nuclear perdition. Also, Russia says one more bomb strike against their ally, in Syria, and they will retaliate! This situation is looking more ominous every day because Trump is such a loose cannon, one wonders what he will do next!
No need to worry. Putin is a murdering psychopath, having a few Syrians killed and a few jets destroyed in a missile strike is an easy sacrifice to keep his asset in the Whitehouse. The truth about the collusion between trump and the Russian mafia, headed by putin was too close to coming out. This gives trump some cover while costing putin nothing. Russia will make threats and claim this is an illegal action, but what was lost? Within a day they were flying sorties, against the opposition to Assad, from the runways of the base. This attack was probably directly approved by putin.
The article isn't about "criticizing put, or trump himself". No one anywhere has equated criticism of Trump with an excuse for bombing anything. Read the fucking piece.
Your comment about the possibility of nuclear war is exactly right. We were very lucky in the first Cold War.
It amazes me that the Democratic leadership is taunting Trump to take a confrontational stand with Putin and the Russians knowing that he is erratic, unpredictable, careless, narcissistic, uninformed, etc. All the qualities that make him exactly the wrong person in a situation that might lead to nuclear disaster.
It's like that old saying: If you're not apprehensive and even frightened by the possibility of what might happen in the Trump era then you're probably not paying attention.
I thought HRC was more likely to force a showdown with the Russians and I know some people who voted for Trump thinking he was less likely to take us into a war with Russia. Two terrible candidates--same result.
For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.
-- Henry Kissinger, March 5, 2014, as the situation in Ukraine was heating up.
And yet that demonization of Vladimir Putin seems to have become the foundation of US policy.
You make a very good point about the Dems (and everybody else, especially the media), pushing an immature, insecure narcissist into having a confrontational relationship with a huge nuclear power. Are these people that stupid?
Just another elaborate 'Con Job' orchestrated by the Conman-in-Chief himself Donald Trump, aided by his Russian Co-conspirator, Vladimir 'The Impaler' Putin.
Only the poorly educated and criminally corrupt feigned excitement.
The author is ill-informed. There is no money appropriated for Syria military expenditures and so there is nothing for Congress to cut off. Even if there were--it should be obvious that the current Republican controlled Congress---which has even Democrats cheerleading Trump's Syria strike---will reject any proposal to cut off such funds. Furthermore--this is not about baiting Trump to be aggressive against Russia. This is about whether Trump while candidate and President-elect (i.e., from June 2015 to January 20th, 2017) colluded and/or coordinated with Russia to undermine or improperly influence our national 2016 elections. If so---then Russia committed an espionage/counter-intelligence act tantamount to an act of War against the United States-----and Trump and/or any of his aides colluding or coordinating with Russia in these acts---are subject to criminal indictments on charges of Treason under United States Code 18 Chapter 115. We cannot and must not tolerate the continued governance of a President who is under the cloud of having committed treason against the country he is now the chief executive of. Any citizen who sees Trump's Syria actions as anything other than a criminal effort to change the subject---is out of his or her mind and is effectively helping Trump change a subject which must remain the main subject until addressed and resolved by an investigative tribunal capable of properly doing so.
Wow. Did a little bird tell you that?