Trump Growing Weary of the Generals Domineering Control of Foreign Policy

[AuH20]

Encouraging. But it sounds like he isn't in charge.

https://www.infowars.com/trump-channels-rand-paul-during-military-meetings/


He has repeatedly pressed Mattis and McMaster in stark terms to explain why U.S. troops are in Somalia. “Can’t we just pull out?” he has asked, according to U.S. officials.

And Trump questioned US involvement in Afghanistan, which is now the country’s longest war:

In a meeting with his top national security aides, the president grew frustrated.

“You guys want me to send troops everywhere,” Trump said, according to officials in the Situation Room meeting. “What’s the justification?”

“Sir, we’re doing it to prevent a bomb from going off in Times Square,” Mattis replied.

The response angered Trump, who insisted that Mattis could make the same argument about almost any country on the planet.

[dannno]

Encouraging. But it sounds like he isn't in charge.

Or he is putting up with them until they finish off ISIS (they are actually pretty close)

[dannno]

And I think he has been weary of them all along, but again, putting up with them because he wants to destroy ISIS (he feels like the US is responsible, Obama being the founder of ISIS and all..)


And remember the US airstrike on a Syrian airfield that made Trump appear aggressive? The strike was the “most limited” military option presented to Trump, according (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/us-said-to-weigh-military-responses-to-syrian-chemical-attack.html?_r=0) to the New York Times – and it effectively neutered Trump’s enemies at the time who were pressuring him to go to war.While this isn’t an endorsement of the strike – it did kill a Syrian pilot – it is worth pointing out that the attack left the runway unharmed (https://www.infowars.com/trumps-syria-strike-what-theyre-not-telling-you/), meaning the air base was left operational for Syria to continue air strikes on ISIS.
It’s as if Trump wanted to appear he could wage war, while maintaining some of the restraint of Rand Paul.

[AuH20]

I'm starting to think that Trump has been relegated to a figurehead, who is completely cut off from his natural instincts. The general triumvirate have him intentionally boxed in.

[nikcers]

Just like witches at black masses.

North Korea presents “a potentially existential” threat to the United States and is likely to conduct more weapons tests this year, Dan Coats said at the Senate Intelligence Committee’s annual hearing on “Worldwide Threats.”
“Decision time is becoming ever closer in terms of how we respond to this,” Coats said.

[kahless]

I'm starting to think that Trump has been relegated to a figurehead, who is completely cut off from his natural instincts. The general triumvirate have him intentionally boxed in.

It seems like Trump in his quest to be liked conceded his power to the military and GOP-E. He gets to feel like a great military leader getting his ego stroked as they give him an attaboy. It will sink in eventually that he has been relegated to a figurehead and unlike past Presidents I do not believe he can emotionally handle that.

So I think the possibility exists yet that Trump may swing back the other way at some point. If it is not after it sinks in he is a figurehead, then rather after they turn on him and they will.

[AuH20]

It seems like Trump in his quest to be liked conceded his power to the military and GOP-E. He gets to feel like a great military leader getting his ego stroked as they give him an attaboy. It will sink in eventually that he has been relegated to a figurehead and unlike past Presidents I do not believe he can emotionally can't handle that.

So I think the possibility exists yet that Trump may swing back the other way at some point. If it is not after it sinks in he is a figurehead, then rather after they turn on him and they will.

I've always said that his hair trigger ego is the path to personal emancipation.

[nikcers]

I pretty much decided that Trump doesn't understand checks and balances in government power and American history when he gave the CIA the ability to authorize their own drone strikes, pretty soon the FBI will authorize their own FISA requests.

[Raginfridus]

Maybe he will learn the same globocops who entangled us in Israel's wars do not know how to win wars, nor even if they could would they want to.

[dannno]

Maybe he will learn the same globocops who entangled us in Israel's wars do not know how to win wars, nor even if they could would they want to.

They have been relatively effective at eradicating ISIS compared to when Obama was in power. Something changed.

[Raginfridus]

Last I checked Assad was fighting those bastards, and our boys were cutting havens out of Syrian soil for our proxy to hide and rearm in.

[AuH20]

Last I checked Assad was fighting those bastards, and our boys were cutting havens out of Syrian soil for our proxy to hide and rearm in.

Trump delegates and the partitioning of Syria goes on. He's not strong enough to fight them. I bet he doesn't even run in 2020 because he's seen the real dark side behind our gov and doesn't like it.

[jkr]

you're the president, give the order.

Ron Paul would have

[acptulsa]

you're the president, give the order.

Ron Paul would have

+rep

Donald Trump Very Stupid Genius is everything I said he was during the campaign. He's not doing the stuff I said he would because (excuse) (excuse) (excuse). He's still the Alpha Dog I told you cucks he was, even though the only reason I'm stuck cucking for his broken promises now is he never got around to growing a pair.

Threads like is make me tired. Funny how they sound exactly like the Obamabots did early in 2010. They'll be hoping for change for the full eight years. Obamabots did. Dubya's Zombies did. Hell, even Nixon's minions did.

They'll never learn. The only thing that confuses me is why they feel the need to embarrass themselves in public this way. If you're going to pray for your Alpha Dog to grow cojones, at least have shame enough to do it in your closet.

[Raginfridus]

Trump is change we can believe in because reasons.

[specsaregood]

I'm starting to think that Trump has been relegated to a figurehead, who is completely cut off from his natural instincts. The general triumvirate have him intentionally boxed in.

So Trump is a cuck?

[AuH20]

So Trump is a cuck?

Possibly. It's worth watching play out.

With that said, no one regrets voting for him, given the options. Even the residual damage to the federal government apparatus has been astonishing to watch.

[acptulsa]

With that said, no one regrets voting for him, given the options.

Anyone who voted for him in a primary and doesn't regret it is...

Ivanka.

[nikcers]

They have been relatively effective at eradicating ISIS compared to when Obama was in power. Something changed.
Fake news war on ISIS got sidelined when we started to target Russia for the false flag attack on our election

Putin destroyed Isis after we armed them to overthrow Assad. They stopped arming ISIS because they were just target practice for Russia's superior fire power, and they want to undermine Russia's influence not sell Russian weaponry by advertising the capabilities.

[euphemia]

I wondered how long it would take him to get to this point.

[XNavyNuke]

State Department is populated with appointees selected by the Whitehouse and approved by the Senate. You don't want a militaristic foreign policy dominated by generals and admirals, then don't populate those political seats with military veterans.

XNN

[nikcers]

State Department is populated with appointees selected by the Whitehouse and approved by the Senate. You don't want a militaristic foreign policy dominated by generals and admirals, then don't populate those political seats with military veterans.

XNN
Trump ran on being the most militaristic person ever, this is fake news. Don't let the schill accounts that told us to pick Trump during the primary when Rand Paul was still running for the Republican nomination and shitty on his domestic policies.

[goldenequity]

I'm not one to inject 'Israel' into every discussion.
but
this can't be overstated or under emphasized:

We loved Ron Paul (a believer) for lots of reasons... ONE of them being:
he wanted to treat Israel just like every other 'foreign country'.
instead of an idol.

People with an idolatry of Israel are very REAL... and I'm not talking a philosophic or geo-political sense.
I'm talking specifically in the TRUE sense of the word: the abomination, distortion or misplacement of 'worship'.

It is literally practiced by the 'Pence-like' folks that 'surrounded' him at the inauguration
and have since deeply influenced him.
He has become an 'ideological' captive... a 'coup of the mind' took place from the inauguration forward. Literally.

I believe it's why we scratch our collective heads wondering what happened to the 'old' Trump.
Now he's having his own 'dissonance' because of it.
In christian circles.... it can REALLY mess with your head.

I'm sure he hasn't a 'clue' as to this being the root cause.
Hopefully a 'light' will come on... one that doesn't seek to manipulate him.

[RonZeplin]

So Trump is a cuck?

He's Jeb! on steroids.

http://images.gawker.com/hsplvj8c9u4sc1e8pwwm/original.gif

[enhanced_deficit]

Where does he stand on General Javanka?


http://video.newsserve.net/v/20170409/1704091538-Ivanka-May-Have-Convinced-Trump-To-Bomb-Syria.jpg (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?519279-If-GOP-neocons-tried-to-push-US-further-towards-Syria-war-GOP-conservatives-should-resist&p=6586595&viewfull=1#post6586595)


Who might get more domineering in control of Foreign Policy after this news:

Breaking: Syrian forces down Israeli F-16 near occupied Golan Heights (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?519275-Breaking-Syrian-forces-down-Israeli-F-16-near-occupied-Golan-Heights&)


On a side note, decorated Iraq war hero and Dem Senator TD should not have called a sitting Commander in Chief CBS.

[enhanced_deficit]

He's Jeb! on steroids.

http://images.gawker.com/hsplvj8c9u4sc1e8pwwm/original.gif



To be fair, Jeb was never a stabilizer genius.

Jeb was also too soft on making DACA pay for the Wall and domineering generals would have controlled him like a mindless puppet.

[TheCount]

Encouraging. But it sounds like he isn't in charge.

https://www.infowars.com/trump-channels-rand-paul-during-military-meetings/


Can we get the thread title changed to reflect the original title of the linked news article?


TRUMP CHANNELS RAND PAUL DURING MILITARY MEETINGSPresident growing more libertarian as he battles swamp
Is there a reason why you chose not to use that title?

[kpitcher]

He probably doesn't want to tick off the generals too much, he appears to really want tanks and rockets for his military parade.

[goldenequity]

Ron Paul ronpaul
Let Korea Be Korea…Bring The U.S. Troops Home

963489010147647489



963548343136931841



963509396864143360

[shakey1]

“Can’t we just pull out?”

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/387/236/a7e.jpg

[goldenequity]

As long as dollar is world’s reserve currency, US can continue to print money falsely & spend on military – ex-CIA officer
https://www.rt.com/usa/418660-us-budget-military-wall/

Phillip Giraldi: I think that everyone expected that Trump’s budget would increase the money to the military. But I think people were surprised by how much he is increasing the money for the military because the US honestly is not threatened anywhere in the world. And the thought of the military having more money doesn’t make sense. And also the social programs would be cut to pay for the military, which will cause some political problems for Mr. Trump.

RT: Trump says the US military is “depleted” but the US already spends far more on defense than any other country in the world. How can that be?

PG: That is one of the mysteries. The US spends more than the next eight countries on the military and it spends far more than any other — far more than Russia, or China, or any other country. So, it is a bit of a mystery why Mr. Trump believes that the military is weak. It seems to me that he is getting bad advice from his generals, most particularly General Mattis at the defense department and I think that is causing the problem.

I think Trump has been convinced by the generals that are in his administration that this money is needed by the military to keep America safe. That is an opinion that I think is false. And I think that Donald Trump can probably not be unconvinced on this, unless there is an economic crash like there was in 2008 which will mean that there won’t be any money to give to the military.

RT: At the beginning of his presidency Trump promised Mexico would pay for the border wall and now it’s got a larger chunk of the budget than is being spent to fight the opioid crisis. Can Trump live up to his campaign promises?

PG: It is clear that Trump cannot live up to his campaign promises. Because he did promise that Mexico would pay for the wall. And he did promise that there would be money for health issues like the opioid crisis. In fact, he has promised that quite recently. So the fact is that even though the US unlike other countries can print all the money it wants, there is still a limit in terms of how much money is in the system to support these things. And paying so much for the military means that other things will not be supported.

RT: The plan would add trillions to the budget deficit. How long can the US continue running up such huge debts?

PG: The fact that America can print money means that it is luckier than most countries, which can’t print money. So, as long as the dollar is the reserve currency for the world, they could continue to print money. But many countries in the world are now tired of using dollars and are talking of shifting to other currencies. That would be the end of the US running a big deficit.

When Trump ran for president, he was talking about the debt and the deficit. But now he seems to have been convinced by the speaker of the House Paul Ryan, who is someone who believes that deficits don’t matter. Somehow he has been convinced by these people that the deficit doesn’t matter. I think that is a mistake and we will see how that plays out but Paul Ryan obviously is giving the president bad advice.

RT: How will the decrease in money spent at home go down with the voting public, especially with mid-term congressional elections coming up later this year? Could this hurt the Republicans?

PG: I think it will definitely hurt the Republicans. People like me, my age, who are dependent on social security and Medicare, do not get a lot of money from these things. But these are sums of money so that people have some healthcare and they have the ability to live and not be poor. When you take away these things, people like me would be voting for someone else other than the Republicans, I think there will be a lot of people voting for not necessarily Democrats, but for candidates who are talking about this and are angry about it.

[Schifference]

I am not knowledgeable in regards to how to run a countries military/defense.

In another thread there is a discussion regarding computers and AI. One person's commented that the first country to achieve a level will forever be the world leader.

I would have to think that technology and weapons has to keep up with sex robots, self driving vehicles, automated burger machines robotic cashiers and tellers.....the list goes on and on including doctors, lawyers......

With that in mind I would have no idea how much should be spent on the military. It is possible that in order to remain safe from some future super predator nation, we might need advanced leading edge weapon technology.

[Anti Globalist]

Trump being relegated to a figurehead? Gee how shocking.

[Raginfridus]

With that in mind I would have no idea how much should be spent on the military. It is possible that in order to remain safe from some future super predator nation, we might need advanced leading edge weapon technology.Oh, absolutely.

[timosman]

With that in mind I would have no idea how much should be spent on the military. It is possible that in order to remain safe from some future super predator nation, we might need advanced leading edge weapon technology.

Something to fight camels with.:cool:

[goldenequity]

963871990531723271

963853677403484161

963829479889080320

[nikcers]

963871990531723271
If we get rid of the air conditioning they'll come home real soon. My best friend grew up in Vegas where 117' isn't out of the normal and he said Iraq made him miss Vegas summers.

[nikcers]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/02/15/exclusive-rand-paul-is-our-military-budget-too-small-or-is-our-mission-too-large/


by SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY) (http://www.breitbart.com/author/sen-rand-paul/)15 Feb 201821 (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/02/15/exclusive-rand-paul-is-our-military-budget-too-small-or-is-our-mission-too-large/#disqus_thread)

EXCLUSIVE–Rand Paul: Is Our Military Budget too Small, or Is Our Mission too Large?

Since 2001, the U.S. military budget has more than doubled in nominal terms and grown by more than 37 percent, accounting for inflation. The U.S. spends more on its military than the next eight countries combined.

This prompts the question: Is our military budget too small, or is our mission too large?

It’s hard to argue that our military is underfunded. Our mission, on the other hand, includes our involvement in combat operations in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger, Libya, and Yemen. We have troops in over 50 out of 54 African countries. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost over a trillion dollars and lasted more than 15 years.

Unfortunately, none of these wars has been authorized by Congress, and Afghanistan and Iraq have gone far beyond their original authorizations. And when all combined, they are draining our treasury. A country can only remain strong as long as it remains solvent.

In Afghanistan, we spend about $50 billion each year. Where does the money go? For troops and weapons, of course, but billions have also been spent on roads, bridges, and schools for Afghanistan. Seems a shame that bridges, roads, and schools crumble here while we persist in nation-building abroad. Maybe it’s time to do some nation-building at home.

Don’t get me wrong. I supported going after the jihadists who attacked us on 9/11. But that mission ended when we killed the plotters and their supporters. The question we need to ask is, “When will the Afghanis be able to defend themselves?”

Most conservatives believe welfare should be temporary, and that ultimately the able-bodied must stand on their own. Foreign assistance is no different. If the U.S. coddles and comforts and does all the fighting, Afghanistan will never become self-sufficient.

People argue that the Taliban will take over Afghanistan, but it won’t if the Afghanis stand and fight. We’ve given them 15 years of training and billions of dollars’ worth of the most sophisticated weapons known to man. Surely, the time for them to step up and fight is now.

Is it worth one more American life to try to build a nation for people unwilling to fight for their own country?

The recent 21 percent increase in the military budget will buy a lot of weapons, but it won’t win the war in Afghanistan. President Obama already tried that. Obama increased our troop levels to around 100,000, and, sure enough, the Taliban ran and bided their time for the inevitable troop withdrawals.

The Taliban now controls a sizeable area of Afghanistan. I cannot, in good conscience, ask our soldiers to go back to Afghanistan to take back the same villages they’ve taken twice, first in 2002 and then again in 2010.

Candidate Trump wisely ran on a platform that the Iraq War was a mistake. But President Trump is surrounded by generals who have never seen a war that they believe cannot be won. And so the wars continue.

My hope is that President Trump will remember candidate Trump, and tell the generals who surround him: “Enough is enough. I’m bringing the boys home.”

[acptulsa]

My hope is that President Trump will remember candidate Trump, and tell the generals who surround him: “Enough is enough. I’m bringing the boys home.”

http://www.funnybeing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Hope-And-Change.jpg

[nikcers]

by SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY) (http://www.breitbart.com/author/sen-rand-paul/)15 Feb 201821 (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/02/15/exclusive-rand-paul-is-our-military-budget-too-small-or-is-our-mission-too-large/#disqus_thread)

EXCLUSIVE–Rand Paul: Is Our Military Budget too Small, or Is Our Mission too Large?

Since 2001, the U.S. military budget has more than doubled in nominal terms and grown by more than 37 percent, accounting for inflation. The U.S. spends more on its military than the next eight countries combined.

This prompts the question: Is our military budget too small, or is our mission too large?

It’s hard to argue that our military is underfunded. Our mission, on the other hand, includes our involvement in combat operations in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger, Libya, and Yemen. We have troops in over 50 out of 54 African countries. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost over a trillion dollars and lasted more than 15 years.

Unfortunately, none of these wars has been authorized by Congress, and Afghanistan and Iraq have gone far beyond their original authorizations. And when all combined, they are draining our treasury. A country can only remain strong as long as it remains solvent.

In Afghanistan, we spend about $50 billion each year. Where does the money go? For troops and weapons, of course, but billions have also been spent on roads, bridges, and schools for Afghanistan. Seems a shame that bridges, roads, and schools crumble here while we persist in nation-building abroad. Maybe it’s time to do some nation-building at home.

Don’t get me wrong. I supported going after the jihadists who attacked us on 9/11. But that mission ended when we killed the plotters and their supporters. The question we need to ask is, “When will the Afghanis be able to defend themselves?”

Most conservatives believe welfare should be temporary, and that ultimately the able-bodied must stand on their own. Foreign assistance is no different. If the U.S. coddles and comforts and does all the fighting, Afghanistan will never become self-sufficient.

People argue that the Taliban will take over Afghanistan, but it won’t if the Afghanis stand and fight. We’ve given them 15 years of training and billions of dollars’ worth of the most sophisticated weapons known to man. Surely, the time for them to step up and fight is now.

Is it worth one more American life to try to build a nation for people unwilling to fight for their own country?

The recent 21 percent increase in the military budget will buy a lot of weapons, but it won’t win the war in Afghanistan. President Obama already tried that. Obama increased our troop levels to around 100,000, and, sure enough, the Taliban ran and bided their time for the inevitable troop withdrawals.

The Taliban now controls a sizeable area of Afghanistan. I cannot, in good conscience, ask our soldiers to go back to Afghanistan to take back the same villages they’ve taken twice, first in 2002 and then again in 2010.

Candidate Trump wisely ran on a platform that the Iraq War was a mistake. But President Trump is surrounded by generals who have never seen a war that they believe cannot be won. And so the wars continue.

My hope is that President Trump will remember candidate Trump, and tell the generals who surround him: “Enough is enough. I’m bringing the boys home.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/02/15/exclusive-rand-paul-is-our-military-budget-too-small-or-is-our-mission-too-large/

Quick everybody to the comment section, I think all of the warmonger bots are trying to influence the Russian election..

[juleswin]

http://www.funnybeing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Hope-And-Change.jpg

This is what frustrates me the most about Rand. I know people say he is cunningly trying to persuade Trump with this sort of talk. But to most people who have figured Trump or will figure Trump out in the coming months, they will see him as a naive and maybe slow insider guy who cannot get it through his head that he has been had by Trump.

Candidate Trump and President Trump is the same people. We saw this with Bush, Obama and now Trump, why is it so hard to understand that this is just what successful candidates do to win elections i.e. pretend to be populists/anti establishment and do a 180 and turn establishment once elected.

[acptulsa]

This is what frustrates me the most about Rand. I know people say he is cunningly trying to persuade Trump with this sort of talk. But to most people who have figured Trump or will figure Trump out in the coming months, they will see him as a naive and maybe slow insider guy who cannot get it through his head that he has been had by Trump.

Candidate Trump and President Trump is the same people. We saw this with Bush, Obama and now Trump, why is it so hard to understand that this is just what successful candidates do to win elections i.e. pretend to be populists/anti establishment and do a 180 and turn establishment once elected.

Well, Rand is a successful candidate too. And what he does is try to show how he's representing his voters without causing them discomfort by destroying their cherished myths, or alienating them by telling them how they're lying to themselves. That's how he won a statewide election, which is more than his father ever did.

When should he stop pretending Trump can be salvaged? When the polls indicate 50% of Kentucky voters see through him? When polls indicate 50% of Kentucky Republicans see through him? Just remember--when he does stop pretending, he can no longer go to Trump and say, 'I'm the only person in this town giving you cover, but I can't keep it up unless you throw the voters this bone...'

[nikcers]

Well, Rand is a successful candidate too. And what he does is try to show how he's representing his voters without causing them discomfort by destroying their cherished myths
Yeah I think its also him carving out his name and his brand as someone who is his own man. If he were to not criticize the foreign policy of the candidate he endorsed it would damage his image of integrity.

[acptulsa]

"Nowadays we have diplomats work on wars for years before arranging them. That's so when it's over, nobody will know what they were fighting for. We lost thousands and spent billions, and you could hand a sheet of paper to one million different people and tell 'em to write down what the last war was for, and the only answer that will be alike will be, 'Damned if I know.'"--Will Rogers

[Origanalist]

It must be tough for Trump with those General's he appointed and handed over control to domineering foreign policy.