Orange Duce

[Trinity]

NATO is suspending training in Iraq. Isis is regrouping there. What happens if the Iraqis ask us the leave? Russia, China and Iran are the big winners. I’m sure all the experts were consulted, possibilities were considered, aren’t you? As David Petraeus said in 2003—Tell me how this ends.

[tech37]

NATO is suspending training in Iraq. Isis is regrouping there. What happens if the Iraqis ask us the leave? Russia, China and Iran are the big winners. I’m sure all the experts were consulted, possibilities were considered, aren’t you? As David Petraeus said in 2003—Tell me how this ends.

As always...sources? Or just your opinion?

[MDlaxfan76]

NATO is suspending training in Iraq. Isis is regrouping there. What happens if the Iraqis ask us the leave? Russia, China and Iran are the big winners. I’m sure all the experts were consulted, possibilities were considered, aren’t you? As David Petraeus said in 2003—Tell me how this ends.

As always...sources? Or just your opinion?

For which aspect are you requesting sources from Trinity?
NATO suspending training?
Or that ISIS is regrouping in Iraq?

http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/2678 ... ni-killing

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50850325

Or the question about what happens and who the winners are?

Yes, there's no source (yet) as to whether the 'experts' were consulted, etc.
Maybe they were, maybe they weren't...what did they advise?

[tech37]

NATO is suspending training in Iraq. Isis is regrouping there. What happens if the Iraqis ask us the leave? Russia, China and Iran are the big winners. I’m sure all the experts were consulted, possibilities were considered, aren’t you? As David Petraeus said in 2003—Tell me how this ends.

As always...sources? Or just your opinion?

For which aspect are you requesting sources from Trinity?
NATO suspending training?
Or that ISIS is regrouping in Iraq?

http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/2678 ... ni-killing

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50850325

Or the question about what happens and who the winners are?

Yes, there's no source (yet) as to whether the 'experts' were consulted, etc.
Maybe they were, maybe they weren't...what did they advise?

Thanks MDlax. Nice to see someone differentiates a news source from their personal opinion.

You working for Trinity now?

[MDlaxfan76]

NATO is suspending training in Iraq. Isis is regrouping there. What happens if the Iraqis ask us the leave? Russia, China and Iran are the big winners. I’m sure all the experts were consulted, possibilities were considered, aren’t you? As David Petraeus said in 2003—Tell me how this ends.

As always...sources? Or just your opinion?

For which aspect are you requesting sources from Trinity?
NATO suspending training?
Or that ISIS is regrouping in Iraq?

http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/2678 ... ni-killing

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50850325

Or the question about what happens and who the winners are?

Yes, there's no source (yet) as to whether the 'experts' were consulted, etc.
Maybe they were, maybe they weren't...what did they advise?

Thanks MDlax. Nice to see someone differentiates a news source from their personal opinion.

You working for Trinity now?

Not at all, just wasn't surprised that what he'd said above was indeed based on reality.
"sources" were very easy to find.

I also think his question is appropriate.

It went to the questions I'd asked earlier about which advisers, if any, were recommending this action, and which advisers were recommending against it. We know that 5 senior national security/foreign policy advisors have resigned very recently, the NSC is overall decimated, so what strategy is actually in place and are those pushing for these actions actual experts in the dynamics of the region?

Was this a 'wag the dog' action given impending impeachment or other political embarrassments?
Maybe, maybe not.

But what we are already learning is that the Administration (Pompeo, DoD spokesperson, Trump etc) are misrepresenting when the decision was made and why. They are claiming that it was based on an imminent threat, yet apparently the decision was made long ago as a retaliation.

It's also relevant that Trump avoided consulting the Gang of 8, whether in the immediate process or back when he originally green-lit the assassination of this bad guy, a senior state official...an act of war.

Kramerica, no one on here or that I've heard on MSNBC or CNN etc are arguing that Suleimani wasn't a very bad guy, no one is 'white-washing him. Unless you are describing the Iranian perspective?

[tech37]

Was this a 'wag the dog' action given impending impeachment or other political embarrassments?
Maybe, maybe not.

I think the wag the dog concept is way too easy and irrelevant re someone like Trump who is a tweet away creating another perceived controversy. Of course the response of a rabid MSM doesn't help. It becomes white noise, especially to the average citizen/voter.

The question is IMO, why would Trump do this now just months away from the elections and possibly putting his ace in hole, the economy, in jeopardy?

There may well be more to it than simply, "boy is he stupid" or, "wag the dog."

[MDlaxfan76]

Was this a 'wag the dog' action given impending impeachment or other political embarrassments?
Maybe, maybe not.

I think the wag the dog concept is way too easy and irrelevant re someone like Trump who is a tweet away creating another perceived controversy. Of course the response of a rabid MSM doesn't help. It becomes white noise, especially to the average citizen/voter.

The question is IMO, why would Trump do this now just months away from the elections and possibly putting his ace in hole, the economy, in jeopardy?

There may well be more to it than simply, "boy is he stupid" or, "wag the dog."

Could be, but if you look at what he's saying at his rally, he's positioning it as another proof that he's a 'tough guy' doing what no prior President would have done.

Fan base eats that up.
Which may be all that matters to him, minute to minute.

That said, the reporting is that he made the call months ago to take the shot when it next became available. That's not what the Admin is publicly saying, but that's the reporting.

If accurate, that would weigh against a 'wag the dog' scenario.

If Bolton was still there, we'd be looking at this as something he was advised to do by the guy in the job. We might be critical of Bolton's hawkishness, but at least we'd be willing to believe that the advice was given. But at this point, it's difficult to say who is even still there with expertise. Sure, the military can give you the technical aspects to deliver the intended result, but the decision process should be far more than a military one. But who is even there?
Again, 5 senior experts resigned int the last weeks...

What's particularly damning about this decision to hugely escalate is that there was no consultation with Congress.
We have a very specific process for such consultation.
It's another flagrant abuse of power.

[tech37]

Was this a 'wag the dog' action given impending impeachment or other political embarrassments?
Maybe, maybe not.

I think the wag the dog concept is way too easy and irrelevant re someone like Trump who is a tweet away creating another perceived controversy. Of course the response of a rabid MSM doesn't help. It becomes white noise, especially to the average citizen/voter.

The question is IMO, why would Trump do this now just months away from the elections and possibly putting his ace in hole, the economy, in jeopardy?

There may well be more to it than simply, "boy is he stupid" or, "wag the dog."

Could be, but if you look at what he's saying at his rally, he's positioning it as another proof that he's a 'tough guy' doing what no prior President would have done. Whoa, you listen to those rallies?! Amazing! I can't...I tried early on out of curiosity and what he says at those rallies means nothing. Base-feeding rhetoric is all... If you're listening to that stuff, it's no wonder you believe he's the next coming of Mussolini

If Bolton was still there, we'd be looking at this as something he was advised to do by the guy in the job. We might be critical of Bolton's hawkishness, but at least we'd be willing to believe that the advice was given. But at this point, it's difficult to say who is even still there with expertise. Sure, the military can give you the technical aspects to deliver the intended result, but the decision process should be far more than a military one. But who is even there? Again, 5 senior experts resigned int the last weeks...

I think it's really interesting that Trump and his advisors showed discretion/patience following the drone shoot down and also the attack on SA oil facility. Someone may have had the foresight to say, let's wait, we'll have better targets at a more opportune time. Of course the Mullahs may be saying same thing right now...we shall see.

[MDlaxfan76]

Was this a 'wag the dog' action given impending impeachment or other political embarrassments?
Maybe, maybe not.

I think the wag the dog concept is way too easy and irrelevant re someone like Trump who is a tweet away creating another perceived controversy. Of course the response of a rabid MSM doesn't help. It becomes white noise, especially to the average citizen/voter.

The question is IMO, why would Trump do this now just months away from the elections and possibly putting his ace in hole, the economy, in jeopardy?

There may well be more to it than simply, "boy is he stupid" or, "wag the dog."

Could be, but if you look at what he's saying at his rally, he's positioning it as another proof that he's a 'tough guy' doing what no prior President would have done. Whoa, you listen to those rallies?! Amazing! I can't...I tried early on out of curiosity and what he says at those rallies means nothing. Base-feeding rhetoric is all... If you're listening to that stuff, it's no wonder you believe he's the next coming of Mussolini

If Bolton was still there, we'd be looking at this as something he was advised to do by the guy in the job. We might be critical of Bolton's hawkishness, but at least we'd be willing to believe that the advice was given. But at this point, it's difficult to say who is even still there with expertise. Sure, the military can give you the technical aspects to deliver the intended result, but the decision process should be far more than a military one. But who is even there? Again, 5 senior experts resigned int the last weeks...

I think it's really interesting that Trump and his advisors showed discretion/patience following the drone shoot down and also the attack on SA oil facility. Someone may have had the foresight to say, let's wait, we'll have better targets at a more opportune time. Of course the Mullahs may be saying same thing right now...we shall see.

I can only take small doses of Der Leader's rallies, but the relevant stuff does get covered. Same for his tweets. I"d go nuts trying to actually follow them (and maybe that explains his followers), but the ones that are most striking do get attention.

Indeed, one can certainly make an argument that retribution was deserved. But the policy of doing so, including an option like this assassination, should have been vetted with Congress, classified. Gang of 8.

I agree, Iran may well take their time for max impact.
Or do a whole series of asymmetric actions in coordination.

But they'll need to make a statement that they are not impotent.

[Brooklyn]

Wag the dog ...

[Trinity]

Cynical or what?

[MDlaxfan76]

War crimes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... RIMES.html

[CU88]

War crimes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... RIMES.html

No one is surprised, and that must be what his military advisers are telling him to do…

[Trinity]

They gotta stop showing him a menu of options.

[Typical Lax Dad]

They gotta stop showing him a menu of options.

He was duly elected so he can order whatever he wants off the menu.

[MDlaxfan76]

War crimes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... RIMES.html

No one is surprised, and that must be what his military advisers are telling him to do…

Pompeo danced around this on each news show this AM, twisting himself into knots to not say that he was aware of, or not aware of, cultural sites as targets. Wouldn't answer the question straight. He said that he'd seen appropriate actions...

The implication being that this tweet was not reflective of what was being planned by the professionals...without saying so.

He also danced around the "imminent" threat aspects, and that "America was made safer", trying to make the questioners appear that they were overly focused on the short term risks to Americans...twisting into knots to do so.

So far, we're not hearing anyone own up to having advised Trump to take this action, just lots of hand waving after the fact.

[ardilla secreta]

Iran was targeting the Urban Cosmetics- Bronx Colors factory. You gotta draw the line somewhere.

[CU88]

Jim Acosta
@Acosta

Today marks the 301st day without a traditional White House briefing, longest stretch of time with no briefing. The previous record was 42 days. Via @AlliemalCNN

[Trinity]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/06/politics ... index.html

It was only a draft. Disregard.

[jhu72]

Wag the dog ...

Yup. Not one believable source is giving evidence of imminent threat they are claiming.