JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[a fan]

If I’m sitting in Tehran, I’m thinking that it would be a great idea to take some hostages and make Trump a one term president.

It will take a long time to find out what the consequences are. But there’s so little reason to believe that trump is being truthful, well informed, or wise.

Trump properties. That's what I'd hit.

[a fan]

That is just silly. Of course I see that. You originally stated that we should prepare to send out kids to die because we have a Republican in office. I stated historically that President Obama increased troupe deployment by some 70,000 in Afghanistan. So, it appears that increasing troupe deployment in foreign conflict is not endemic to a singular party.

If Brookies Dems had voted no on the Iraq invasion, we would not have invaded. It's on them. Yep, it was Bush's idea....but he put it to a vote. The Dems failed.

And the liberals, as usual, told America what would happen. Shocker. They were right. Again. For like the tenth straight war.

I think the vast majority of all average Americans, Republican or Democrat, desire less war, less dead Americans.

Polling suggests otherwise. The average American wanted us to go to both Iraq and Afghanistan. What Americans do, is play the "golly willikers, this war didn't play out like we thought" game. And then they don't want all the consequences that come with choosing to go to war.

Rinse. Repeat.

I have had conversations with friends who are both democrat and republican and to a person, everyone of them has said they hope this does not drag us into another war. They may disagree on the strike itself but not one wants to see us go to war.

And people who have sex without birth control hope they don't pregnant.

We have to grow up and take responsibility for actions that paint us into a corner. We do it again and again and again. We've been at war almost without pause since WWII. Saying Americans don't want war is utterly laughable when you look at the scoreboard.

Yes. Yes we DO want war. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

If we didn't want war, we wouldn't have troops deployed all around the world. If you want to talk about whether it's justified, or if we're keeping the peace, you can certainly do that. But you can't say a country that's been at war for decades doesn't want war. It's just a silly claim on its face.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You can almost see a parallel between the years of ME conflict/protesting and what is going in Hong Kong. The more people learn (the rise of the internet/social media) the more 'the people' want freedom/free will.

Pain causes people to pivot, let's hope in the right direction.

Same exact line of thinking we used in invading Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran will be different?

How's this desire for freedom and free will working out for the Syrians?

What you are asking for, is the equivalent of shooting a postage stamp on the moon with a pellet gun. You're asking for a democracy to take over in Iran.

And please don't come back with "no I'm not". Because if that's not what you're asking for.......shall we go over all the bad things that will happen if we get an Iranian Civil War? Not could. What WILL happen?

As usual, Americans aren't thinking this out past the ends of our noses.

My view is let them figure it out on their own. I wonder when did the USA start having problems with the Middle East? They folks just woke up one day and said we don’t like Americans out of the blue.

EDIT: https://www.cnn.com/

[old salt]

Trump found a clever way to withdraw US troops and hand over Iraq to Iran. Can the neo-cons be far away?

That's what my gut tells me. We have a relatively small presence in Iraq (& Syria). Not large enough to defend themselves. We're at the mercy of the Iraqis for force protection from their Shia PMF militias & to provide bases for logistics/evac routes for our forces in NE Syria. Even before the elimination of Solemani, that was becoming impossible, given the increasing number of attacks on US bases. There was a movement to expel US forces, even before the recent US reprisals for the killing of an American & the attack on our Embassy.

Keep in mind - we are no longer in Iraq as a conquering army of occupation. Those forces departed in 2011. We only returned in 2014, in response to their desperate pleas for help. We built a coalition to defeat ISIS & rebuilt/reequipped the ISF into an effective fighting force. In so doing, we (& our coalition partners) were deferential to Iraqi nationalism & self-governance. We were able to work smoothly with their military chain of command, even to the point that they kept their PMF militias under control.

With the (temporary) elimination of the ISIS threat, Iraqi factionalism is on the rise again, being fueled by Iran to establish influence via their Shia proxies. We are no longer organizing the Kurds, Sunni & nationalist Shia Arab factions to push back.
Trump is anxious to exit & let the locals deal with ISIS remnants & sort things out in Syria for themselves.
All Trump's looking for is a way to safely withdraw our forces & diplomats from Iraq (& Syria), consolidate our remaining forces on joint bases in host allied gulf states, & help our Arab allies defend against Iran's adventurism.

Neocons will (accurately) howl that we're ceding the Shia crescent through Iraq & Syria to Iran.
Trump doesn't care. He'll say that's not our problem. Let the locals sort it out.

I may be way off base. There may be a deeper plan in place to salvage some of our presence in Iraq & Syria, but it's hard to imagine.
It's now up to the Iraqis if they want to remain a US ally or become Iran's Shia b!tch nation.
In our absence, sectarian civil war might return to Iraq.

[DocBarrister]

Trump found a clever way to withdraw US troops and hand over Iraq to Iran. Can the neo-cons be far away?

That's what my gut tells me. We have a relatively small presence in Iraq (& Syria). Not large enough to defend themselves. We're at the mercy of the Iraqis for force protection from their Shia PMF militias & to provide bases for logistics/evac routes for our forces in NE Syria. Even before the elimination of Solemani, that was becoming impossible, given the increasing number of attacks on US bases. There was a movement to expel US forces, even before the recent US reprisals for the killing of an American & the attack on our Embassy.

Keep in mind - we are no longer in Iraq as a conquering army of occupation. Those forces departed in 2011. We only returned in 2014, in response to their desperate pleas for help. We built a coalition to defeat ISIS & rebuilt/reequipped the ISF into an effective fighting force. In so doing, we (& our coalition partners) were deferential to Iraqi nationalism & self-governance. We were able to work smoothly with their military chain of command, even to the point that they kept their PMF militias under control.

With the (temporary) elimination of the ISIS threat, Iraqi factionalism is on the rise again, being fueled by Iran to establish influence via their Shia proxies. We are no longer organizing the Kurds, Sunni & nationalist Shia Arab factions to push back.
Trump is anxious to exit & let the locals deal with ISIS remnants & sort things out in Syria for themselves.
All Trump's looking for is a way to safely withdraw our forces & diplomats from Iraq (& Syria), consolidate our remaining forces on joint bases in host allied gulf states, & help our Arab allies defend against Iran's adventurism.

Neocons will (accurately) howl that we're ceding the Shia crescent through Iraq & Syria to Iran.
Trump doesn't care. He'll say that's not our problem. Let the locals sort it out.

I may be way off base. There may be a deeper plan in place to salvage some of our presence in Iraq & Syria, but it's hard to imagine.
It's now up to the Iraqis if they want to remain a US ally or become Iran's Shia b!tch nation.

It’s delusional to think Trump or his advisors have thought things through even that far.

Trump did this because he thought it would help him politically. He is constantly looking for opportunities to look like a “hero”. He was booed at a stadium the very same day he announced the killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, which must have certainly surprised him. The killing of Solamanei has garnered mixed-to-negative reviews at best (he must have been deeply disappointed when even Tucker Carlson criticized the killing). He is constantly trying to better Obama, and is constantly failing.

That’s because President Obama was a near-great president. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is a racist, bigoted, misogynistic, sexual-assaulting, Putin-feet-kissing, Russian-money-laundering, justice-obstructing, incompetent, lying piece of trash.

DocBarrister

[youthathletics]

BARHAM SALEH’S THREAT TO RESIGN AMID THE BONFIRES OF IRAQ’S CRISIS

https://1001iraqithoughts.com/2020/01/0 ... qs-crisis/

Could this be any more complicated?

It actually simplifies it and proves that the internal wars of the ME countries are primarily internal conflicts of power between religion and politics......and religion often prevails because the people of the ME are primarily Muslim. And that does not sit well when political people want power.

You can almost see a parallel between the years of ME conflict/protesting and what is going in Hong Kong. The more people learn (the rise of the internet/social media) the more 'the people' want freedom/free will.

Pain causes people to pivot, let's hope in the right direction.

Makes you wonder how people survived before social media.

That's just it, they 'survived', now they want to live.

You need to get out more. You have been brainwashed by propaganda. It’s not that simple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... e=emb_logo

There, when they talk about life in America, poor people are over represented in their reporting. I don’t want to live there but it’s not all peasants.

I am quite aware of that, my reply was all about power and the fighting/wars in the ME for thousands of years, not business and major city life.

You are intimating that the people will rise up to become more westernized because life is better here. Social media lets them see what they are missing. Same can be said of peasants in Mississippi, WV, Eastern Tennessee and Kentucky etc. I have said for years, these people are under represented in our mass media. You don’t see them.

Word salad. I am not intimating they want to westernize at all, merely that their govt' and religious leaders are and have been creating a climate of tension and fighting. If it is so simple and we are so ignorant as you stated, then why are they always fighting with each other in these regions? I would love to hear your take and not a youtube article.....actually your input on how the chaos in the ME gets solved, diffused...something other than contentious.

Which conflict? Their land was arbitrarily carved up and given away is part of it. My field is not geo politics with a concentration in Middle East social conflict. Must be yours, since you have a plausible answer. I just know it’s not a simple minded solution.

The simplest solutions are almost always the answer....trying to side step being accountable with thoughts or ideas of your own because you claim your are not educated on the subject has never stopped you from telling everyone else they are either incorrect or wrong for thinking a certain way.

[MDlaxfan76]

Seems to me that complex problems don't lend themselves to simple solutions, much less "simple minded" solutions.

[Typical Lax Dad]

BARHAM SALEH’S THREAT TO RESIGN AMID THE BONFIRES OF IRAQ’S CRISIS

https://1001iraqithoughts.com/2020/01/0 ... qs-crisis/

Could this be any more complicated?

It actually simplifies it and proves that the internal wars of the ME countries are primarily internal conflicts of power between religion and politics......and religion often prevails because the people of the ME are primarily Muslim. And that does not sit well when political people want power.

You can almost see a parallel between the years of ME conflict/protesting and what is going in Hong Kong. The more people learn (the rise of the internet/social media) the more 'the people' want freedom/free will.

Pain causes people to pivot, let's hope in the right direction.

Makes you wonder how people survived before social media.

That's just it, they 'survived', now they want to live.

You need to get out more. You have been brainwashed by propaganda. It’s not that simple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... e=emb_logo

There, when they talk about life in America, poor people are over represented in their reporting. I don’t want to live there but it’s not all peasants.

I am quite aware of that, my reply was all about power and the fighting/wars in the ME for thousands of years, not business and major city life.

You are intimating that the people will rise up to become more westernized because life is better here. Social media lets them see what they are missing. Same can be said of peasants in Mississippi, WV, Eastern Tennessee and Kentucky etc. I have said for years, these people are under represented in our mass media. You don’t see them.

Word salad. I am not intimating they want to westernize at all, merely that their govt' and religious leaders are and have been creating a climate of tension and fighting. If it is so simple and we are so ignorant as you stated, then why are they always fighting with each other in these regions? I would love to hear your take and not a youtube article.....actually your input on how the chaos in the ME gets solved, diffused...something other than contentious.

Which conflict? Their land was arbitrarily carved up and given away is part of it. My field is not geo politics with a concentration in Middle East social conflict. Must be yours, since you have a plausible answer. I just know it’s not a simple minded solution.

The simplest solutions are almost always the answer....trying to side step being accountable with thoughts or ideas of your own because you claim your are not educated on the subject has never stopped you from telling everyone else they are either incorrect or wrong for thinking a certain way.

What was the simple solution in Vietnam that nobody thought of? Your solution is overthrow the government so the people can express “free will”....you talk about the ME like it’s one country....news. It’s not one country and all the people don’t think alike.....sort of, you know, how it is in the USA.....we all don’t think alike. I am no expert. I just have friends that grew up there. Some stayed here and some went back and some travel back and forth. One friend’s son is a high level college lacrosse player. Loves his country but loves it here too. My wife’s Post doc friend is Dutch, she married an Iranian. Nice guy they moved to Tehran for a while.

[Bart]

That is just silly. Of course I see that. You originally stated that we should prepare to send out kids to die because we have a Republican in office. I stated historically that President Obama increased troupe deployment by some 70,000 in Afghanistan. So, it appears that increasing troupe deployment in foreign conflict is not endemic to a singular party.

If Brookies Dems had voted no on the Iraq invasion, we would not have invaded. It's on them. Yep, it was Bush's idea....but he put it to a vote. The Dems failed.

And the liberals, as usual, told America what would happen. Shocker. They were right. Again. For like the tenth straight war.

I think the vast majority of all average Americans, Republican or Democrat, desire less war, less dead Americans.

Polling suggests otherwise. The average American wanted us to go to both Iraq and Afghanistan. What Americans do, is play the "golly willikers, this war didn't play out like we thought" game. And then they don't want all the consequences that come with choosing to go to war.

Rinse. Repeat.

I have had conversations with friends who are both democrat and republican and to a person, everyone of them has said they hope this does not drag us into another war. They may disagree on the strike itself but not one wants to see us go to war.

And people who have sex without birth control hope they don't pregnant.

We have to grow up and take responsibility for actions that paint us into a corner. We do it again and again and again. We've been at war almost without pause since WWII. Saying Americans don't want war is utterly laughable when you look at the scoreboard.

Yes. Yes we DO want war. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

If we didn't want war, we wouldn't have troops deployed all around the world. If you want to talk about whether it's justified, or if we're keeping the peace, you can certainly do that. But you can't say a country that's been at war for decades doesn't want war. It's just a silly claim on its face.

I had written a response with questions, replies and such and just erased it. I got tired and my simple brain hurt. I will say 2 things:
1. the unprotected sex line was fantastic
2. i can see the geopolitical reasons for certain actions. I see the need to protect our selves and I can even see the need to go to war to protect our assets and those of our allies. that being said, i do not WANT to see more of our young soldiers die. i do not WANT to be at war. i can accept that during certain situations it is warranted.

you win the internet today............

[tech37]

You've never said what the big picture goal is. Not once. I'd bet we have the same big picture goal.

Bliss a fan.. sheer bliss

Another time, watching Cuse/ND

Cool. Enjoy the game!

Enjoy? Geez, no Dome Cooking from the refs last night. At buzzer SU frosh guard gets fouled on three point make to put game within one, but no call from refs to send him to line (he's leading nation in free throw percentage too)...ouch. Actually despite the outcome, it was a great game and I did enjoy it

So by big picture I mean we disagree from the start re what should have happened re Iran when Trump was elected. I agree with the decision to end JCPOA and you obviously didn't/don't. No matter how much we discuss the details, it won't matter...I have my opinion and you yours. In my mind it makes perfect sense to "bail" (as you put it) when the a fan vortex forms and I get sucked in. What's the point? It doesn't always happen, but on this issue it sure does.

That said, let me state my position one last time on why it was correct to put an end to JCPOA. I understand your position/opinion but simply disagree.

JCPOA did not include a mandate that Iran end terrorist activities across the ME. JCPOA did not address the ICBM program (the F'ing nuc delivery system after all!). And, JCPOA did not allow for inspections of military sites where, it doesn't take much imagination to figure out, they were hiding stuff actually noncompliant with JCPOA. That's IMO.

Here's another "big picture" disagreement... you say, but it kept them from having a nuc weapon!... and I say it only slowed them down. I believe they never stopped working on it, and why the military sites were off limits to inspectors. I've posted articles in past which discussed evidence of their cheating during JCPOA, before Trump ended it.

The other red herring position is...those who say, but Iran was complying with the agreement! That is not the point... the point is that the things that were not addressed, not part of JCPOA, made it a horrible agreement on our part in the first place.

My other consistent position, which goes way back is, I believe the best case scenario re Iran would be to see the Mullahs overthrown from within. I've posted numerous articles over the years dealing with uprisings when they happened. I also was quite critical of Obama when he did nothing to help the uprising in 2009, (due to visions of JCPOA in his head I suppose).

Now a fan, I've never stated that the regime would be internally overthrown, just that I optimistically hoped it would. Capisce?

So a fan, I hope we don't need to discuss this again because we just don't see eye-to-eye on the basic issue. And that's OK

[old salt]

That is just silly. Of course I see that. You originally stated that we should prepare to send out kids to die because we have a Republican in office. I stated historically that President Obama increased troupe deployment by some 70,000 in Afghanistan. So, it appears that increasing troupe deployment in foreign conflict is not endemic to a singular party.

If Brookies Dems had voted no on the Iraq invasion, we would not have invaded. It's on them. Yep, it was Bush's idea....but he put it to a vote. The Dems failed.

And the liberals, as usual, told America what would happen. Shocker. They were right. Again. For like the tenth straight war.

I think the vast majority of all average Americans, Republican or Democrat, desire less war, less dead Americans.

Polling suggests otherwise. The average American wanted us to go to both Iraq and Afghanistan. What Americans do, is play the "golly willikers, this war didn't play out like we thought" game. And then they don't want all the consequences that come with choosing to go to war.

Rinse. Repeat.

I have had conversations with friends who are both democrat and republican and to a person, everyone of them has said they hope this does not drag us into another war. They may disagree on the strike itself but not one wants to see us go to war.

And people who have sex without birth control hope they don't pregnant.

We have to grow up and take responsibility for actions that paint us into a corner. We do it again and again and again. We've been at war almost without pause since WWII. Saying Americans don't want war is utterly laughable when you look at the scoreboard.

Yes. Yes we DO want war. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

If we didn't want war, we wouldn't have troops deployed all around the world. If you want to talk about whether it's justified, or if we're keeping the peace, you can certainly do that. But you can't say a country that's been at war for decades doesn't want war. It's just a silly claim on its face.

... . Still debating Bush 45's decision to invade Iraq in 2003. Why not wind the wayback machine back to '91 & question Bush 43's decision to go ashore in SA to expel Iraq from Kuwait ? We've been staging in Kuwait, & actively engaged militarily in the ME, since 1991.

What matters now, is the situation in the ME today. We left Iraq in 2011, we were (urgently) invited back in 2014.
That was a reset. We only went back to Iraq (& into Syria) to fight ISIS.
All the whining about anything we did pre-2014 is irrelevant to the situation we confront today vis a vis Iran.
Iranian proxies have begun attacking us in Iraq. We are responding.

It can be reasonably argued that Trump's actions are being done to withdraw from the ME.
Look at the nature of the forces we are sending in.
Think of them as being sent in to cover our withdrawl, rather than to take & hold territory.

[a fan]

Enjoy? Geez, no Dome Cooking from the refs last night. At buzzer SU frosh guard gets fouled on three point make to put game within one, but no call from refs to send him to line (he's leading nation in free throw percentage too)...ouch. Actually despite the outcome, it was a great game and I did enjoy it

Nice. My Pop still watches SU basketball after all these years. SU Class of 62, I think.

JCPOA did not include a mandate that Iran end terrorist activities across the ME. JCPOA did not address the ICBM program (the F'ing nuc delivery system after all!). And, JCPOA did not allow for inspections of military sites where, it doesn't take much imagination to figure out, they were hiding stuff actually noncompliant with JCPOA. That's IMO.

And when I buy a car, the dealer, surprisingly, doesn't throw in a boat.

The deal was signed in 2015. All available intel said they were less than a year away from a nuke. That was five years ago. At what point do you simply admit you were wrong?

The other red herring position is...those who say, but Iran was complying with the agreement! That is not the point... the point is that the things that were not addressed, not part of JCPOA, made it a horrible agreement on our part in the first place.

Understood. What I don't get is how you think having nothing-----no deal on anything-----is superior to having nothing. Agree to disagree, that's fine.

My other consistent position, which goes way back is, I believe the best case scenario re Iran would be to see the Mullahs overthrown from within. I've posted numerous articles over the years dealing with uprisings when they happened. I also was quite critical of Obama when he did nothing to help the uprising in 2009

This is the part I actually want to discuss. Let's ignore the above parts----we just disagree, and that's fine.

Paint me a picture as to what it is you think will happen in your best case scenario in Iran. I'm assuming you understand that the Mullahs and other hyper-religious factions won't simply hand over power, yes? So what would this change of power look like?

[Bart]

It can be reasonably argued that Trump's actions are being done to withdraw from the ME.
Look at the nature of the forces we are sending in.
Think of them as being sent in to cover our withdrawl, rather than to take & hold territory.

Then the president welcomes the Iraqi parliaments vote to remove US troops?

[cradleandshoot]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/s ... -than-bush. I have nothing against what BHO did. I am waiting for all you FLP weeds to explain to me how BHO's assassinations were justified when Trumps were not. I am also waiting for an explanation why BHO didn't ask for permission when he assassinated our enemies. Come on you FLP weeds… take a stab at it. I hope our caspar milquetoast republican doesn't have to speak for yall.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

[Bart]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

Everyone that doesn’t agree with him.

[a fan]

All the whining about anything we did pre-2014 is irrelevant to the situation we confront today vis a vis Iran.
Iranian proxies have begun attacking us in Iraq. We are responding.

It's relevant because we're using the same strategy and worldview that brought us to the ME in the first place. You're too stubborn to listen, so here you and I are.

It can be reasonably argued that Trump's actions are being done to withdraw from the ME.

No. No it can't.

If we're withdrawing from the ME, why did Trump pull out of the JCPOA? Why would he care if Iran is fomenting terrorism if we're leaving? And he sure as *hit wouldn't intentionally try and pressure Iranians to incite a Civil War as he is with the severe sanctions.

Speaking as someone who actually wants to leave? The JCPOA is our ticket out. The signees are on the hook for Iran now. It's their problem. Walk away.

Look at the nature of the forces we are sending in.

That's a change in tactics, not strategy. You just don't want to hear it. Nothing Trump has done or said tells you that our strategy has changed in this region.

If our forces are getting attacked by Iran, and Trump REALLY wanted to leave? His reaction wouldn't be to send reinforcements. His reaction would be to pull every last troop out.

Trump---and you----is still using same worldview. Trump cares if Iran causes trouble. He cares if Iran increases its reach in the region. Someone who wanted to leave would. not. care.

They'd simply leave. Now it's someone else's problem.

[cradleandshoot]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

sorry... FAR LEFT PROGRESSIVE. A despicable reprobate that predominates on this forum.

[cradleandshoot]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

Everyone that doesn’t agree with him.

Chickenchit response. Justify what Obama did. Anytime you disagree with me I know I am correct in what I am thinking.