Is Trump caving?

Yeah, Trump gets to be "the strong leader" and "react to the red line", and people are taken in by that, meanwhile the use of chemical weapons isn't even an issue Trump cares about since he has no way of actually verifying that it was Assad, and in fact we were lied to 4 years ago that Assad gassed his people then, when actually it wasn't even him or his government. They're still repeating this lie today on NPR, incidentally.

Now Russia is responding. The US just declared war on one of Russia's key allies, through a likely false flag operation designed to manipulate support for war just as happened on 9/11. This is so obviously all bullshit, we don't even need to see the grinning faces of McCain and Shillery to know it.

And as Styx points out, we just made it a lot harder to actually fight ISIS in Syria, thanks to Trump declaring war on Syria for no fucking reason. We can no longer coordinate with Russia there. Russia will just roll over and accept this, without defending its key ally? No fucking way. What about Iran in the region, also an ally of Russia and Syria? This is all so fucking insane. Even if we needed to send some kind of message that US military power would be used more rationally now, we just fucked that up royally considering we were manipulated into declaring war on another nation for no fucking reason, not to mention Russia and Iran being involved due to that nation being their strategic and regional ally.

Now Tillerson is blaming Russia for a gas attack that was probably done by FSA or ISIS, or even perhaps the CIA. Nice work.

Meanwhile, "Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov provided some of that color on Friday, by stating that Russian President Vladimir Putin “considers the U.S. strikes against Syria an aggression against a sovereign country violating the norms of international law, and under a trumped-up pretext at that.”

Right, because that is exactly what it is. The US Pax Americana NWO paradigm has become that the US just does whatever the fuck it wants to, disregarding sovereign rights of other nations and people wherever it likes. Also disregarding the US's own Constitution, which is a big deal.

Any person or nation that believes in Might makes Right is going to be in for an ugly reality check at some point. The simple fact that one is able to engage some violent act cannot be conflated with having a reason or justification for the act. Yet that is basically what US foreign policy had become, and to the severe detriment of developing our diplomatic skills around the world. Dick-wagging and throwing sanctions around is pretty much what passes for diplomacy in the US now, as can be seen by the likes of McCain and Shillery and all like them (95% of congress).

I've lost much of my faith in Trump, I don't like to say it but there it is. He fucked up healthcsre reform, he attacked his own core supporters for actually wanting to do what Trump said he wanted to do; he appointed a tool Gorsuch who will further increase corporacratic tyranny over the American people; he is pulling in people to his team from the CFR after promising to drain the swamp; his proposed budget is merely debt-neutral; he is declaring war in another country for no fucking reason; and his Sec of State is openly blaming Russia for that same issue.

Good things Trump has done so far: pull out from TPP, start process of bidding for the wall, threaten to pull funds from sanctuary cities (hasn't actually done it yet as far as I know), caused much reinvestment of capital back into American businesses, tried to get a reasonable travel ban, call out the fake MSM, and seems to be progressing fairly well with China so far.

So I guess I'll wait and see what happens.

Thrasymachus wrote:

So you trust and want the same people who have destabilized and fucked up the ME for decades, the same ones now lauding Trump's illegal missile attack, to step in and "finish the mission they started?" That makes no sense to me at all.

I am certain that I have absolutely never given any statements that should lead to that impression.
I don't even know which people those are. I don't read MSM.

My logic has been stated explicitly several times over on this forum, the past days, and Ive encouraged Trump in getting pro actively pro Isreal since the days right after the elections when all the alt right started cursing the Jews and telling Trump he should ditch Israel. What Trump immediately did instead was engage them and announce the move of the embassy to Jerusalem. That was an unambiguous signal that he was going to escalate the tensions with with Iran, to overturn Obolko's policies which had made the US into an Iranian client-state.

Russia doesnt like that as it likes to have the US as a client state of its client state. But they'll have to live with it. What are they going to do? Not go to war, because this is not about their own sovereign territory at all. This is not about their Ukraine border, this is no life or death issue for them.

Of course I dont think Trump did this because of the babies. I think he did it for the same reason why he had a pillar-of-severity-type rabbi follow him on stage at his inauguration.
Obolko was entirely in service of expansionist Islam. Trump is tightly allied with Zionism.

They look pretty relaxed together.

I don't like the term "zionism", partly because of the negative connotations and also because I don't know what it actually means. Otherwise I agree with what you're saying, the Clintons and Obarry were in the pocket of the Saudis and dissed Israel. That is stupid. I like it if Trump restores ties between Israel and the US. And I would like it if he restores with with Russia too, I suspect that Russia is only allied with Syria and Iran out of convenience or necessity, whereas Israel and the US would make much nicer allies for Russia.

On the ME issue, what is the end-game goal there, as you see it? How do you want US intervention to play out there?

The idea that isis could be defeated without removing the direct causes of their existence is not reflecting any kind of reality.
When Trump said he was going to wipe isis from the face of the Earth, that meant to me he was going to extensively bomb Syria and attempt restructuring of its politics.

Assad is of an alawite minority sect. he's been able to rule Syria simply because has the most atrocious torture apparatuses known to man. The despair and hate he caused with his father since the 70's in this hellish way has created the context for isis to take hold.

Now that the syrians have actually died by the hundreds of thousands to get him the fuck out, it becomes an absolute absurdity to ask them to forget it all and just allow him to stay in power.

Now whether or not this makes for a legitimate practical ground for Trumps actions I can't say. Whether it's legal or not is ab absurd question, as nothing the US has done internationally the past 100 years was legal. They probably toppled at least a hundred regimes. I do not buy into the myth of international law. Obolko has been committing illegal acts of war in a dozen countries on a weekly basis, Bush did nothing besides that, Clinton invaded and bombed a sovereign European nation and then split it up, Bush sr. annihilated tens of thousands Iraqi civilians 'by accident', Johnson, Kennedy were at war in Vietnam, etc etc etc - but Trump has not invaded a country. he inherited a war. He's now trying to win that war, and maybe he will fail. That is how I see it.

We will indeed have to wait and see as to how this plays out.

Thrasymachus wrote:

I don't like the term "zionism", partly because of the negative connotations and also because I don't know what it actually means.

It has a clear cut meaning, which for muslims is explicitly negative, as it is for nazis, but for me it is explicitly positive.

This is very unambiguously what it means to people who call themselves by the name:

Quote :

   a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel. It was established as a political organization in 1897 under Theodor Herzl, and was later led by Chaim Weizmann.

Quote :

Otherwise I agree with what you're saying, the Clintons and Obarry were in the pocket of the Saudis and dissed Israel. That is stupid. I like it if Trump restores ties between Israel and the US. And I would like it if he restores with with Russia too, I suspect that Russia is only allied with Syria and Iran out of convenience or necessity, whereas Israel and the US would make much nicer allies for Russia.

On the ME issue, what is the end-game goal there, as you see it? How do you want US intervention to play out there?

The end goal as I see it is a secularization and an elimination of political islam as an overarching movement. I want the leadership of Iran broken. Id like the Saudis to break as well but thats not in the cards now.

The path to do this as I see it, have seen it for 20 years, is business and capitalism, markets. Instead of military and puppets, we should be putting down huge malls and stuff in Palestine and the ME, buy up land there and plant it full of commercial secularist things, especially things that provide information on science, philosophy, humanity.

because first of all the population has to be able to see, sense, feel the alternative as actually possible and within reach.
If you look at the constant flux of refugees and immigrants in general from the ME into the west, it's pretty clear that they would like it over there if that place was westernized as well.

As to how exactly to do this - I'd both need top clearance as well as make it my full time job to plan that out - it's not going to happen fast, at all, of course - but the only path to pulling it off - if this is indeed a plan of any kind - is by ridding Israel of its UN shackles and letting them become a structural integrity.

This has so many angles and hooks, that it's truly irrational for me to come out and say 'this, this, this, and then that' - of course it will be very messy and protracted process - as it has been...

I wont claim that Trump will win this. I simply agree that it is necessary to take a leading hand in this and say fuck diplomacy, if it gets so many people killed. It's not worth anything if it costs as many lives as war does. The "peace process" as it has been called, needs to be terminated.

I've never heard that Assad is part of the causality of ISIS, in fact I've heard the exact opposite, that Assad actively and brutally fought radical Islam and presided over a fairly secular country with decent protection for Christians.

The cause of ISIS is simply the US. The US destabilized the region, creating the power vacuum and human misery that led to ISIS. Remember that Afghanistan and Iraq were both fairly secular, tolerant places and even decently modernized (western music was common in Afghanistan, for example), and women were not required to veil in public nor were they forced into arranged marriages.

The US deliberately turned these places into bombed out hellholes, leading to the misery and suffering and power vacuums that created ISIS. So I'm sure you can understand how I can't see the US as part of the solution at all, except for the US to stop doing what it's been doing there for so many decades.

ISIS exists now, it needs to be dealt with. The US can maintain some presence for targeted attacks on ISIS and FSA (Al Qaeda basically, just more anarchic extremists) and other radical militants groups, but otherwise shouldn't be involved at all. Let India and China and Russia assist in the region. And most importantly, let the people who live in these areas be able to organize some kind of local spontaneous organizations and groups to protect their own lands and interests, to form toward their own governing structures whatever those happen to be.

This idea of Americans as liberators is a complete lie. We caused all these problems, and there is no way we can fix them except to return these regions to their own people, and possibly keep providing some limited strikes on the most extreme degenerate groups like ISIS. We certainly shouldn't be attacking these countries or governments themselves, like we've been doing this whole time.

I can agree that western economic and intellectual influence, capitalism, could be tremendous benefit to the ME. But it isn't as if we can just set that up out of nowhere. We tried setting up democracies over there, it doesn't result work because democracy isn't part of their cultural heritage. Islam is already a political force, unlike Christianity. Islam prescribes a politics. As for capitalism, I see no reason why Islam and capitalism can't coexist nicely, and certainly capitalism over there would help moderate the extremist tendencies by bringing wealth and economic freedoms. But you also need political freedoms to make that work, and I would also assume that the US would just throw up a bunch of Walmarts and McDonalds everywhere if it could, rather than foster actually local rational economic-capitalist networks in these places.

Quote :

I've never heard that Assad is part of the causality of ISIS, in fact I've heard the exact opposite, that Assad actively and brutally fought radical Islam and presided over a fairly secular country with decent protection for Christians.

The cause of ISIS is simply the US. The US destabilized the region, creating the power vacuum and human misery that led to ISIS. Remember that Afghanistan and Iraq were both fairly secular, tolerant places and even decently modernized (western music was common in Afghanistan, for example), and women were not required to veil in public nor were they forced into arranged marriages.

The US deliberately turned these places into bombed out hellholes, leading to the misery and suffering and power vacuums that created ISIS. So I'm sure you can understand how I can't see the US as part of the solution at all, except for the US to stop doing what it's been doing there for so many decades.

ISIS exists now, it needs to be dealt with. The US can maintain some presence for targeted attacks on ISIS and FSA (Al Qaeda basically, just more anarchic extremists) and other radical militants groups, but otherwise shouldn't be involved at all. Let India and China and Russia assist in the region. And most importantly, let the people who live in these areas be able to organize some kind of local spontaneous organizations and groups to protect their own lands and interests, to form toward their own governing structures whatever those happen to be.

This idea of Americans as liberators is a complete lie. We caused all these problems, and there is no way we can fix them except to return these regions to their own people, and possibly keep providing some limited strikes on the most extreme degenerate groups like ISIS. We certainly shouldn't be attacking these countries or governments themselves, like we've been doing this whole time.

I won't directly argue with these positions, let me just make some relevant statements.

Assad is unusually cruel. This is how he has stayed in power and fought off his enemies. And yes, a community of Christians and Jews was allowed - even though all the strong willed ones were first culled.

Ive read much about Assads methods of keeping the peace. It's just not something I can condone. Ive of course also been in the country, and what Ive seen and been shown fortifies my view on him.

Assad had large groups of people killed and dumped into the street on a very regular basis. Any time I pointed my camera on a building that wasnt marked residential my guide jumped on me in deathly fear. Who knows what happened to his friends for far less.

At this point Assad has killed so many of his own civilians that he simply can not be expected to lead anymore. The day of the attack the Russians sneaked out a statement that their support for Assad isnt unconditional.

Whereas the US has caused very much of this misery, it was started by the English, who have far less scruples, none in fact.

I do see Trump as very different from his predecessors, as these always went to great length to justify their attacks and get the UN behind them using lies. Trump just attacked and said fuck the UN, fuck Russia, and fuck Iran most of all. I kind of like that. I may be a bit wicked in this sense.

Thrasymachus wrote:

I can agree that western economic and intellectual influence, capitalism, could be tremendous benefit to the ME. But it isn't as if we can just set that up out of nowhere. We tried setting up democracies over there, it doesn't result work because democracy isn't part of their cultural heritage.

Yes, so fuck democracy. For them. Capitalism does not need it. Just put up malls and libraries and cinemas.
Democracy elected Hitler. It's not necessarily a virtuous system. Capitalism however can be relied upon, if it doesnt come with too much politics.

Quote :

Islam is already a political force, unlike Christianity. Islam prescribes a politics. As for capitalism, I see no reason why Islam and capitalism can't coexist nicely, and certainly capitalism over there would help moderate the extremist tendencies by bringing wealth and economic freedoms. But you also need political freedoms to make that work, and I would also assume that the US would just throw up a bunch of Walmarts and McDonalds everywhere if it could, rather than foster actually local rational economic-capitalist networks in these places.

The old US would definitely just do that. I am simply hoping that the new US will ally with Israel in a structural way and start an indefinite campaign of secularizing and economizing the world around Israel.

Egypt, as Sisyphus mentioned, could be tremendously valuable. That direction, to the west, had escaped me for a moment. But of course if there is any country which can lay any claims to culture in that region other than Israel or even above Israel, it is... ze old Egypt.

Capitalism as Walmart/McDonalds would just be another way for the west to destroy these cultures, and would be actively resisted by ME people even more than they resist western-style democracies being imposed on them. I say let them lead their own lives, let them manage and build their own countries for once. The worst tyrants over there have been due to US support anyway. It's basically our fault that these places are what they are, that they haven't had a chance to modernize and develop toward capitalism for example. Hell, just look at Pakistan and what they did to the Bhutto's. This is some very fucked up shit that the US has been doing in the ME, I don't trust the US one bit with seriously fixing any of these problems it has caused.

It is all one massive globalist effort to destabilize and colonize the ME, which includes radicalizing as many Muslims as possible. So yeah, I can't support US involvement over there anymore except for limited strikes against the very worst 'terrorist' groups.

When we assume the US will keep doing as theyve done before, for which you have reasons, I see that, then that must be the conclusion. Pulling out is the best option.

But pulling out simply leaves our chosen tyrants in power and the population completely ravaged, thus unable to resist these tyrants. I dont think they will even in three centuries come out on top of the mess the US and England have produced together.

Thus, I am hoping for a different approach, which Trump seems to be taking. After all this unilateral strike was very far from standard tactic. He is clearly not playing the 'getting the UN on board' game. Which is really, really good, as the UN is effectively, by democratic law, an Islamic organization.

They called Israels claim to its own 3000 year old temple wall, "Illegal". Bye UN.

I wish I could find that story I mentioned about the Israeli settlers, it was really great. A couple younger Jewish settlers were interviewed and talked about what the land means to them, and what it means to work hard to build a house, farm, and settle there. It gave a completely different image to the situation than what media normally gives, and was in these Jewish people's own words. You could hear the passion and vigor in their voices when they talked about their lands and settling the frontier there, reclaiming their links to their heritage. It was very inspiring to hear. I don't actually look down on the settlements anymore after hearing that.

Thrasymachus wrote:

I wish I could find that story I mentioned about the Israeli settlers, it was really great. A couple younger Jewish settlers were interviewed and talked about what the land means to them, and what it means to work hard to build a house, farm, and settle there. It gave a completely different image to the situation than what media normally gives, and was in these Jewish people's own words. You could hear the passion and vigor in their voices when they talked about their lands and settling the frontier there, reclaiming their links to their heritage. It was very inspiring to hear. I don't actually look down on the settlements anymore after hearing that.

That's very nice to read. If you ever find it, send it to me, I'll want to send it to my father.
He is not religious, married a non Jewish woman too, but his emotional ties to the Jewish story are so deep and sensitive that any such stories move him deeply, and give him a peace that I think all Jewish hearts yearn for.

A right to the Earth, that's what theyve been after for 2500 or 3000 years, a right that was so explicitly denied to them all the time where they could not own land in any European country.

It is strange that Judaism birthed Christianity (world influence) which then birthed Islam (world influence), while Judaism remained so marginal. The original Old Testament probably still forms the ideological backbone of Christian and Muslim ideology, although I'm not a religious scholar so can't confirm that. But I have read that it was the Jewish invention of the alpha-betical language system around 1800 BC or whenever it was that jump-stated human civilized development.

Quote :

Before the alphabet was invented, early writing systems had been based on pictographic symbols known as hieroglyphics, or on cuneiform wedges, produced by pressing a stylus into soft clay. Because these methods required a plethora of symbols to identify each and every word, writing was complex and limited to a small group of highly-trained scribes. Sometime during the second millennium B.C. (estimated between 1850 and 1700 B.C.), a group of Semitic-speaking people adapted a subset of Egyptian hieroglyphics to represent the sounds of their language. This Proto-Sinaitic script is often considered the first alphabetic writing system, where unique symbols stood for single consonants (vowels were omitted). Written from right to left and spread by Phoenician maritime merchants who occupied part of modern Lebanon, Syria and Israel, this consonantal alphabet—also known as an abjad—consisted of 22 symbols simple enough for ordinary traders to learn and draw, making its use much more accessible and widespread.

By the 8th century B.C., the Phoenician alphabet had spread to Greece, where it was refined and enhanced to record the Greek language.

http://www.history.com/news/ask-history/who-created-the-first-alphabet

What a great connection there, right to Ancient Greece.

Thrasymachus wrote:

It is strange that Judaism birthed Christianity (world influence) which then birthed Islam (world influence), while Judaism remained so marginal. The original Old Testament probably still forms the ideological backbone of Christian and Muslim ideology, although I'm not a religious scholar so can't confirm that. But I have read that it was the Jewish invention of the alpha-betical language system around 1800 BC or whenever it was that jump-stated human civilized development.

Pezer confirmed that for me, he said all these strong minded Catholics were always quoting the most hardcore Old Testament people.

Nietzsche also spoke well of them. They remained marginal for several reasons I think - in terms of the demands it makes, it really isnt so much a religion as a protocol for society, which also includes this maternal bloodline which is, rare conversions aside, essential to being regarded Jewish. Im definitely not considered a Jew by Jews. More of a case of interest, strangely well versed in things that for them really are only spoken to by rabbi's on very special occasions. That's pretty awesome actually. The few terms I know from my occult studies of the tree of life put light in their eyes and a total amazement, apparently these words are so charged with magnificence that it has a physiological effect on them.  I can almost literally blow their minds. These terms arent applied in regular life, in secular "ivrit", the invention of the Zionists for which they are chastised by those that insist the Hebrew word must be kept a religious word strictly. It was indeed an incredibly irreverent and bold move of that one man who decided 'oh, we need a language now' in 1930 or so, and just went about adapting Biblical Hebrew to a modern language. But of course this was appropriate to the reinhabiting of the land where the language originated. I suppose the really unholy thing had essentially been that they couldnt be in their temple when they spoke Hebrew, so they just spoke Jiddish and Russian and English and German and Dutch, and what not, waiting for the proper halls to let the old word resound.

Curiously then indeed that they spawned no less than two world religions, both of which have bred extreme violence against them. But I can also explain their lack of mass appeal by one simple quality that distinguishes their faith from the two others and from religion in general - they have no afterlife.

This, the existence of Israel, is the afterlife of all the Jews past.

Thrasymachus wrote:

Quote :

Before the alphabet was invented, early writing systems had been based on pictographic symbols known as hieroglyphics, or on cuneiform wedges, produced by pressing a stylus into soft clay. Because these methods required a plethora of symbols to identify each and every word, writing was complex and limited to a small group of highly-trained scribes. Sometime during the second millennium B.C. (estimated between 1850 and 1700 B.C.), a group of Semitic-speaking people adapted a subset of Egyptian hieroglyphics to represent the sounds of their language. This Proto-Sinaitic script is often considered the first alphabetic writing system, where unique symbols stood for single consonants (vowels were omitted). Written from right to left and spread by Phoenician maritime merchants who occupied part of modern Lebanon, Syria and Israel, this consonantal alphabet—also known as an abjad—consisted of 22 symbols simple enough for ordinary traders to learn and draw, making its use much more accessible and widespread.

By the 8th century B.C., the Phoenician alphabet had spread to Greece, where it was refined and enhanced to record the Greek language.

http://www.history.com/news/ask-history/who-created-the-first-alphabet

What a great connection there, right to Ancient Greece.

Beautiful.

A thread on this in Linguistics could be good.

This morning I read something that made me feel we need to go to war, we need to destroy our civilization.
Some democrats are suggesting Trump attacked Syria to hide his ties to Russia.
I think I'd prefer it if Washington as a whole is nuked, over to ever have to read stupidity like that again.

Trust me, the "Trump is a Russian plant" narrative has been planned since at least late 2015. I know because one of these goons revealed it to me, in an online talk, without even realizing that he was giving away the plan. These 'people' behind this are quite literally insane--- by that I mean they believe in shape shifting alien time travelling cyborgs from another dimension working out of RT to take over the entire planet. ....yeah. You can be sure that at least some of these people are literally that insane. They actually drank the koolaid, while many others just go along with it for their job security.

Humans are goddamn retarded.

Right. I know people who are occupied with fighting transdimensional foes. "Black goo" and all that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OWxa_uKeIg

I don't mock what I don't understand, I just admit that I don't yet understand it. But I do openly mock people who believe shit simply because it gives them a religious high to do so. Anyone I've ever talked to about this Trump Russia crap, or any of those other fucked up conspiracy shit, had never been able to demonstrate or argue reasonably for any of it. So I just assume their fucking retarded, neoreligious psychos.

We live in a declining culture. This sort of stuff is going to keep gaining traction as minds continue to deteriorate and die. Meanwhile people will keep buying into propaganda because the lack of Christianity forces them into insanity (lack of philosophical clarity and self-consistency).

Christianity is growing rapidly in China, though, and China is set to be the largest Christian nation on earth. Positioned as it is amongst Islamic nations, things will certainly get interesting. The western value system isn't dead, but it is probably going to spark wars and continue to migrate as nihilism keeps engulfing America and Europe. Truth doesn't die, it simply hides for a while where people are unworthy of it. And then buried truth ends up living anyway, through all the negative effects and consequences of its having been covered over.