RON PAUL: TRUMP FLIP-FLOPS ON SYRIA WITHDRAWAL. AGAIN.

[Warlord]

President Trump is reversing his foreign policy decisions so quickly these days that it almost seems like he overturns himself before making the decision in the first place. Last week he was very clear that the US was pulling its troops out of Syria. “Bringing soldiers home,” he said. “Let someone else fight over this long-bloodstained sand.”

But then he overturned himself later in the same speech. He said: “We’ve secured the oil and therefore a small number of US troops will remain in the area where they have the oil. And we’re going to be protecting it and we’ll be deciding what we’re going to do with it in the future.”

Where does President Trump think he gets the legal or moral authority to send US troops to illegally occupy foreign territory and determine what that foreign country can or cannot do with its resources? After eight years of Obama’s disastrous “Assad must go” policy, during which the US provided weapons and training to radicals and terrorists with a half million people killed as a result, President Trump had the opportunity to finally close that dark chapter of US foreign policy so the Syrian people could rebuild their country.

Instead he sat down on Thursday with Senator Lindsey Graham, who has been wrong in every foreign policy position he’s ever taken, and decided to follow Graham’s advice to take Syria’s oil. Even though Trump himself has said many times that ISIS is 100 percent defeated, he claims we must take Syria’s oil to keep it from ISIS.

The real reason the neocons want the US military to occupy Syria’s oil fields is they are still convinced they can overthrow Assad by carving out eastern Syria for the Kurds. They don’t want to keep the oil from ISIS, they want to keep it from the Syrian government. They don’t want the oil revenue to be used to help rebuild the country because they still want to make life more unbearable for the population through sanctions so they will overthrow Assad. They don’t care how many innocent civilians die.

So instead of bringing the troops home like he promised, President Trump has allowed himself to be convinced to actually expand the US presence in eastern Syria! Instead of ending a foolish mission, he’s giving them an even more foolish mission – and sending in more troops and weapons. Instead of removing the approximately 200 troops in that region as promised, Trump is going to add more troops to equal about a thousand. He’s also sending in tanks and other armored vehicles, according to the Pentagon.

If President Trump believes following neocon advice on Syria is going to produce results different than the past eight years of following neocon advice on Syria, he’s naïve or worse. This new mission is going to cost tens of millions of dollars per month and will only serve to inspire the next generation of radicals. Trump is right that the people of the region, including Russia, Iran, Syria, and Turkey have all the incentive to keep ISIS at bay. So why does he fold like a cheap suit every time the neocons strong-arm him into another dumb foreign policy position?

This article first appeared at RonPaulInstitute.org.

https://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-trump-flip-flops-on-syria-withdrawal-again/

[Swordsmyth]

The troops will leave, they will have to when the Kurds join Assad's military.

[Warlord]

The troops will leave, they will have to when the Kurds join Assad's military.

How certain are you? I'm losing faith. Once these deployments happen they rarely get reversed.

[dannno]

I think the idea is they are securing the oil for Assad, so that the terrorists don't come in and grab it. Once things have settled down they should be able to leave.

[Swordsmyth]

How certain are you? I'm losing faith. Once these deployments happen they rarely get reversed.
I'm very certain.
The Kurds are negotiating with Assad right now and Assad already controls the border crossings we need to use to supply the troops.
If Trump doesn't withdraw the troops he will have to go to war with Assad directly and he won't do that.

[Warlord]

General Mark Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said on Monday that US forces would remain in Tanf along the Iraqi border, and more were being sent to the oil fields operated by the US energy corporation ConocoPhillips around Deir Ezzor in eastern Syria.

Video footage from the region showed US military convoys re-entering Syria, days after Donald Trump had ordered them out in advance of a Turkish invasion. The change of mind reportedly came after Pentagon officials persuaded the president that it was essential to protect east Syrian oil resources.

“Keep the oil, I’ve always said that. We’ve secured the oil,” Trump told a police chiefs’ conference on Monday. The president has said that his aim would be to secure a US share of Syrian oil revenues, which is potentially a war crime.

The defense secretary, Mark Esper, claimed that the objective of the deployment was to guard the oil fields to prevent the revenues benefiting Isis but also to keep them out of Syrian regime or Russian control, so that the benefits went to the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

“We want to make sure that SDF does have access to those resources in order to guard the prisons, in order to arm their own troops in order to assist us with the defeat Isis mission,” Esper said.

Trump has defended his decision to abandon the SDF, saying it was not America’s job to police a longstanding conflict between Turks and Kurds, but Esper said that the US troops remaining in Syria those who remain would be “staying in close contact with the Syrian Democratic Forces, who have fought alongside us”.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/28/syria-us-troops-oil-fields-isis

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/28/syria-us-troops-oil-fields-isis
We might hand them over to the Kurds but the Kurds will have to hand them over to Assad as part of any deal they cut.

[CCTelander]

Ron Paul: "We just marched in, so we can just march out."

Donald Trump: "I just marched them out, so I can just march them right back in. I giveth snd I taketh away." (And he does just that)

Trump Fans: "Yay! Troops coming home!" (Against all evidence to the contrary.)

Just another average day in Post Trump America.

[Superfluous Man]

This whole thread sounds really familiar.

[CCTelander]

No matter how many times they get smacked in the nose with the rolled up newspaper of reality, Trump supporters find some reason to keep the faith and come right back for more.

[dannno]

No matter how many times they get smacked in the nose with the rolled up newspaper of reality, Trump supporters find some reason to keep the faith and come right back for more.

I think it's you who have lacked the smack in the nose from reality.

[CCTelander]

I think it's you who have lacked the smack in the nose from reality.


You're entitled to your opinion.

[dannno]

You're entitled to your opinion.


Well I'd like to hear your opinion.

What would have happened if Trump decided to bring the troops home and put Hillary Clinton in jail on his first day of office?

Would everything be sparkles?

It's not my opinion that there is a secret cabal running our government. I would call them a cabal of Satanic pedophiles, but let's keep it simple. You think they would have just allowed that all to happen?

[pcosmar]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/27/trump-wants-to-make-a-deal-with-exxon-or-others-to-tap-syrian-oil.html

President Donald Trump on Sunday said he’s interested in making a deal with ExxonMobil or another energy company to tap Syrian oil reserves.

“What I intend to do, perhaps, is make a deal with an ExxonMobil or one of our great companies to go in there and do it properly...and spread out the wealth,” he said.




And, number three, it can help us, because we should be able to take some also.

Seriously?
There are people here who will defend outright Theft?


I think some need to rethink this.

[CCTelander]

"You put U S troops in
You take U S troops out
You put U S troops in
And you sabre rattle all about...."

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/27/trump-wants-to-make-a-deal-with-exxon-or-others-to-tap-syrian-oil.html





Seriously?
There are people here who will defend outright Theft?


I think some need to rethink this.

It's not going to happen, it's completely impractical and I don't think Trump means it, he is just talking tough.

[Swordsmyth]

"You put U S troops in
You take U S troops out
You put U S troops in
And you sabre rattle all about...."
There are less troops in less of Syria now and the remaining troops will leave before long.

[CCTelander]

There are less troops in less of Syria now and the remaining troops will leave before long.


Yes. Yes! I see it now.

It's not Quantum Dark Energy Wormhole CHESS.

It's Quantum Dark Energy Wormhole Hokey Pokey!

Brilliant!

[Anti Globalist]

Well I'd like to hear your opinion.

What would have happened if Trump decided to bring the troops home and put Hillary Clinton in jail on his first day of office?

Would everything be sparkles?

It's not my opinion that there is a secret cabal running our government. I would call them a cabal of Satanic pedophiles, but let's keep it simple. You think they would have just allowed that all to happen?
If Trump tried doing all that in the span of a day he would be definitely be dead man.

[dannno]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/27/trump-wants-to-make-a-deal-with-exxon-or-others-to-tap-syrian-oil.html





Seriously?
There are people here who will defend outright Theft?


I think some need to rethink this.


Well, Assad does owe Trump hugely, if not for Trump the deep state would have taken Assad out already.

Trump helped defeat Assad's enemies (ISIS), which Obama and the deep state funded.

If anything, the deep state should have their wealth confiscated and put toward the US debt and let Syria have all of the oil.

[enhanced_deficit]

This whole thread sounds really familiar.

Rinse, repeat.

Trump: 'Just Kidding. We're Staying In Syria.' (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?521077-Trump-Just-Kidding-We-re-Staying-In-Syria&)
04-05-2018

[tfurrh]

Yes. Yes! I see it now.

It's not Quantum Dark Energy Wormhole CHESS.

It's Quantum Dark Energy Wormhole Hokey Pokey!

Brilliant!

That's what it's all about.

[pcosmar]

Well, Assad does owe Trump hugely,

Oh Phuck Off..

Good Pot doesn't make you that stupid. WTF?

[pcosmar]

It's not going to happen, it's completely impractical and I don't think Trump means it, he is just talking tough.

You mean he is LYING.

What part is he not LYING about?

I can't tell.. his stupid clown mouth moves the same either way.

So far it has been LIES. or complete Bull$hit.

[dannno]

Oh Phuck Off..

Good Pot doesn't make you that stupid. WTF?

Good pot makes you smart.

If it wasn't for Trump, Assad would be dead.

Take that to the motherfuckin bank.

[Swordsmyth]

Good pot makes you smart.

If it wasn't for Trump, Assad would be dead.

Take that to the motherfuckin bank.
Maybe pot makes some people smart and others stupid.

[pcosmar]

Take that to the motherfuckin bank.

I don't even have an account.

You used to make some sense occasionally..

Your delusions are quite apparent to any witnesses.

[jmdrake]

https://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-trump-flip-flops-on-syria-withdrawal-again/

Infowars posting something critical of Trump? I'm shocked!

[r3volution 3.0]

Ron Paul...?

...doesn't ring a bell.

This is the new and improved liberty movement.

We believe in giant deficits and increased spending and harassing China and Iran.

...oh, and taking their oil (whoever's, doesn't matter).

[eleganz]

Ron Paul...?

...doesn't ring a bell.

This is the new and improved liberty movement.

We believe in giant deficits and increased spending and harassing China and Iran.

...oh, and taking their oil (whoever's, doesn't matter).


Yea I don't think you get to invoke Ron Paul anymore buddy, see sig.

You still have not answered to that yet despite multiple call outs, btw.

[r3volution 3.0]

Yea I don't think you get to invoke Ron Paul anymore buddy, see sig.

Yea, I don't think you ever had a firm grasp of libertarianism, or reality in general. For instance, you thought that a lifelong Democrat such as Donald Trump, who made all his money lying to people on television would make a good President. Nevermind that he was on record supporting a wide variety of radically anti-libertarian policies such as inflationary monetary policy (which he's currently promoting). People such as yourself, who don't actually have any clear ideas are easily mislead, aren't you?

[eleganz]

Yea, I don't think you ever had a firm grasp of libertarianism, or reality in general. For instance, you thought that a lifelong Democrat such as Donald Trump, who made all his money lying to people on television would make a good President. Nevermind that he was on record supporting a wide variety of radically anti-libertarian policies such as inflationary monetary policy (which he's currently promoting). People such as yourself, who don't actually have any clear ideas are easily mislead, aren't you?

ooohhh the personal attack....I seem to have hit a major nerve here. You can pull out the libertarian measuring stick if you want but I have never defended my degree libertarianism nor do I ever intend to because I feel secure about my beliefs. Frankly, I thought you were above something as infantile as that. But I get it, you were embarrassed by my signature and you know its not going anywhere, so your veins are inflammed with eleganz blood right now.

BACK to the topic and I'm going to break it down for you so you can't run from it, even though you just literally did evade what I said, what is that, like the 4th time you ignored it? Anyway.


You invoked Ron Paul....fact

I told you, you're in no position to be invoking Ron Paul since you since to think his position on anonymous accusers is....a grotesque embarrassment. At least when you were called out on it, you were silent, super silent, big league silent. Evading posts where I specifically call you out for it....thats a fact too, isn't it?

And what do you do next? Attack me for not understanding libertarianism and somehow making it about Trump and his lies, which has nothing to do with Ron Paul's position on anonymous accusers.

Now do you want to debate whats at hand or do you want to keep making cheap shots at my understandings of libertarianism? lol.


For the record, I have never, even once led anybody on RPF to believe that Trump was pro-libertarian. Actually quite the opposite. I have always warned those on RPF that Trump was not, is not and never will be a libertarian candidate/president, nor did he even attempt to court our vote. So yea, sorry bud, you're wrong on that too.

[Slave Mentality]

I think the idea is they are securing the oil for Assad, so that the terrorists don't come in and grab it. Once things have settled down they should be able to leave.

I thought they told us that Assad was a terrorist lover and that's why we needed to spill blood and treasure Over There to remove him? Now we need to spill blood and treasure Over There to protect the oil for someone our government has been actively been trying to remove so that other bad guys (also funded by Our Guys) don't get the oil? US troops protecting Syrian oil? That authority must be somewhere in the all encompassing interstate commerce clause or something.

[enhanced_deficit]

Reasons would keep evolving, after securung oil filds in Syria, we may have to send more troops to Iraq and mideast to secure civilians there. But main reason (Iran-Israel rivalry) is not be cited that was also a catalyst of recent shift of most of troops from Syria to Iraq. For same reasons, Syria's oil fields can't be left to Syrian regime as it is an ally of Iran. Looking at Syria developments alone without keeping in view full context of the situation in the region is not going to be helpful in understanding the situation.


Hundreds killed, thousands injured in unrest, Iraqi PM says Israel is responsible for attacks
Scores killed as Iraq forces clash with protesters
27 Oct 2019
More than 60 people have been killed in two days of demonstrations against Iraq's government.
aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/scores-killed-iraq-forces-clash-protesters-191027092916816.html


October 6, 2019
104 people killed in Iraq unrest, 6,000 wounded: Interior Ministry
reuters.com/article/us-i...-idUSKCN1WL0DV


Iraqi PM says Israel is responsible for attacks on Iraqi militias: Al Jazeera
2 Min Read
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - “Investigations into the targeting of some Popular Mobilisation Forces positions indicate that Israel carried it out,” Al Jazeera quoted Abdul Mahdi as telling it.
reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security/iraqi-pm-says-israel-is-responsible-for-attacks-on-iraqi-militias-al-jazeera-idUSKBN1WF1E5

Falih al-Fayyadh's visit comes a day after Iraq's prime minister directly blamed (https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2019/10/1/iraqi-pm-blames-israel-for-attacks-on-iran-backed-militias) Israel for a series of airstrikes targeting Iranian-backed PMF forces in the country.
alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2019/10/2/iraqi-militia-leader-meets-us-defence-secretary-in-washington

US, Israeli efforts to contain Iran put Iraq’s stability on the line
Alleged IDF airstrikes targeting Iranian-backed paramilitaries have heightened divisions between the Shiite groups and Iraqi government20 September 2019
BAGHDAD (AP) — As the United States and Israel escalate their push to contain Iranian influence in the Middle East, countries in Tehran’s orbit are feeling the heat.



Is Iraq the New Front Line in Israel’s Conflict with Iran?

By Amos Yadlin, Ari Heistein
| August 27, 2019
The plan in 1981 was to keep the strike secret, and Israel was not to take responsibility. But it was only weeks before Israeli elections, and taking credit proved too tempting for Begin. The Israeli operation aroused considerable irritation in Washington, and the U.S. response was to condemn the strike and embargo the delivery of a third F-16 squadron to Israel.
Now, 38 years later, it appears Israel has once again carried out an attack on Iraqi territory. The Aug. 20 strike near Balad air base in Iraq was the fourth in a series of recent explosions on bases controlled by Iranian-backed Iraqi militias. The explosions have targeted Iranian missile shipments as well as upgrade kits for advanced guidance. The rest of the incidents remain unattributed.
foreignpolicy.com/2019/08/27/is-iraq-the-new-front-line-in-israels-conflict-with-iran/

[dannno]

I thought they told us that Assad was a terrorist lover and that's why we needed to spill blood and treasure Over There to remove him? Now we need to spill blood and treasure Over There to protect the oil for someone our government has been actively been trying to remove so that other bad guys (also funded by Our Guys) don't get the oil? US troops protecting Syrian oil? That authority must be somewhere in the all encompassing interstate commerce clause or something.

Trump was always against removing Assad. He campaigned against removing Assad. He campaigned on removing ISIS from Syria.

He is one of the only politicians of all time who has actually done what he promised. Ya, we still have troops there.. and the neocons are pressuring him hard to keep troops there and they are committing false flags any time he orders a troops withdrawal. It is a difficult situation, as the President needs to maintain good optics with the people who know msm is fake news and like Trump, but don't know the extent of the deep state false flag situation. There are a lot of people like that who need to be a little more woken up. But is he going after Assad? No. He is going after ISIS. That much seems pretty clear.

[Ender]

Pretty much my POV:



As Trump said, “We’ll be deciding what we’re going to do with it in the future.” In no other international power dynamic would this be considered a rational thing for anyone to say. The idea of another nation invading Texas and seizing control of its oil fields and then Xi Jinping or whomever saying “We’re controlling their oil and we’ll be deciding what we’re going to do with it in the future” is unthinkable, but a US president can just come right out and say this about a weaker nation and it won’t even be front-page news.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Donald Trump is the most honest US president of all time. By that I don’t mean that he’s an honest person; he of course lies constantly. I simply mean that while his predecessors have always made sure to dress their imperialist military campaigns up as benevolent humanitarian intercessions, Trump just stands there out in the open like “Yeah we grabbed their oil and it’s ours now, blow me.” There was once a time when claiming a war was really about oil got you branded a conspiracy theorist. Now the US president just outright says it.

And this is really the only reason establishment power structures dislike Trump. They don’t feel directly threatened by him, they just dislike the way he’s always saying the quiet part out loud. Status quo power has a vested interest in keeping a smiling mask on things and preventing people from thinking too hard about what’s really going on in the world, and Trump keeps ripping off that mask by telling everyone what he’s doing in plain English.

“We Want To Keep The Oil”
By Caitlin Johnstone

Full article here:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/10/no_author/we-want-to-keep-the-oil/

[TheTexan]

Bring the oil home :cool:

[Superfluous Man]

He is one of the only politicians of all time who has actually done what he promised.

How is his promise to eliminate the national debt in 8 years coming along?

[dannno]

How is his promise to eliminate the national debt in 8 years coming along?

Depends on what metric you use.

You don't understand how the world works at all, or you are here to be purposely deceptive, so you are definitely using the wrong metric.

[Superfluous Man]

Depends on what metric you use.

You don't understand how the world works at all, or you are here to be purposely deceptive, so you are definitely using the wrong metric.

What metric do you use, and how is he doing in keeping his promise to eliminate the national debt in 8 years according to that metric?

[Swordsmyth]

How is his promise to eliminate the national debt in 8 years coming along?
He is doing the best he can considering Congress won't cooperate:



More winning. President Trump is reducing the Debt to GDP ratio indicating that under his Presidency the economy is growing faster than the national debt!

According Rex Sinquefield at Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinquefield/2016/11/29/obama-and-the-dems-dismal-recovery/#40acfd8dcb0e) in October of 2016:

The Obama recovery of the last seven years remains the worst in postwar American history. Average gross domestic product (GDP) growth since the bottom of the recession in 2009 was barely above 2.1% per year. The average since 1949 is well above 4% per year during the previous 10 expansions.
This result is not just bad, it is catastrophic. The average American should not be wondering if his or her income is a bit above or below 2007 levels. Just by historical averages, the average American should be 20% better off than in 2007. And this slow growth is settling in as a permanent new-abnormal.
I believe the root cause of abysmal growth is the huge tax increases imposed by Obama and the Democrats in Congress since 2008. The most harmful were the increase in the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent, the increase in top bracket income from 35 to 39.6 percent, and the new tax of 3.8 percent on investment income in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The massive increase in regulatory burden through the ACA and Dodd-Frank bills (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodd%E2%80%93Frank_Wall_Street_Reform_and_Consumer _Protection_Act) are also crushing, but unfortunately are harder to measure.
President Obama never reached an annual GDP Growth rate of more than 3.0%. No President over the past century had not ever been held to GDP growth rates of less than 3.0% until Obama. But President Trump averaged a better than 3% GDP last year.




More impressively, when comparing the amount of US Debt from the government’s daily report of debt (https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=01&startDay=20&startYear=2017&endMonth=12&endDay=31&endYear=2019) to the amount of GDP from the current GDP release (https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2019-09/gdp2q19_3rd_0.pdf), the amount of debt to GDP is decreasing under President Trump (a very good thing).
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/Debt-to-GDP-6-2019-414x600.png
The ratio of debt to GDP is decreasing drastically – from 105.3% when Obama was President to 103.2% at the end of the 2nd Quarter of 2019! (Note that Obama increased the Debt to GDP ratio by 30% over his first two years and more than 40% during his two terms in office. Also, under Obama the Fed kept rates at 0% for his first seven years!


If President Trump had the same luxury of a 0% interest rate as Obama the Debt to GDP would be much less because US debt would be $1 trillion less.

More than one trillion of the two trillion increase in debt under President Trump is due to the Fed’s increase in rates.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/Debt-to-GDP-6-2019-Chart-600x507.png
Winning, Winning, Winning!

If not for the Fed, the US would be paying down national debt.

Despite this, the economy is getting stronger and stronger.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-than-us-debt/ (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/winning-winning-winning-president-trump-decreases-debt-to-gdp-ratio-indicating-economy-growing-faster-than-us-debt/)

[Superfluous Man]

He is doing the best he can considering Congress won't cooperate:


When he made that promise did he think that Congress wanted to do what it would take to eliminate the national debt, and he just didn't find out they didn't until after he got elected?

And for that matter, do you honestly believe that it's just Congress not wanting to cooperate? Do you honestly think that it was remotely possible to eliminate the national debt (not just the annual deficit, but the entire existing debt) in just 8 years? What level of spending cuts would that require? And do you honestly believe that Trump would ever support that level of cuts?

[Swordsmyth]

When he made that promise did he think that Congress wanted to do what it would take to eliminate the national debt, and he just didn't find out they didn't until after he got elected?

And for that matter, do you honestly believe that it's just Congress not wanting to cooperate? Do you honestly think that it was remotely possible to eliminate the national debt (not just the annual deficit, but the entire existing debt) in just 8 years? What level of spending cuts would that require? And do you honestly believe that Trump would ever support that level of cuts?
I think he found out that the swamp was much worse than he thought after he got in office.
And I don't know if the debt could be eliminated in just 8 years but if we had big enough spending cuts and big enough tax/regulation cuts to grow the tax base we could make major progress if not eliminate it.
We could also just shred the debt owned by the Fed and the Social Security trust fund and then phase out Social Security.

[acptulsa]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/Debt-to-GDP-6-2019-Chart-600x507.png


Did you just duck a question by posting a chart? Did Zippy teach you how to do that?

And what is this Gateway Pundit chart, that caused you to tap the B icon and channel Charlie Sheen, promoting? Why, Modern Monetary Theory, of course! What else would an apologist for a Democrat-turned-politician extol?

[Swordsmyth]

Did you just duck a question by posting a chart? Did Zippy teach you how to do that?

And what is this Gateway Pundit chart, that caused you to tap the B icon and channel Charlie Sheen, promoting? Why, Modern Monetary Theory, of course! What else would an apologist for a Democrat-turned-politician extol?
The point is that Trump is reducing the debt to GDP ratio without MMT, if Congress would cooperate with spending cuts and more tax and regulation cuts he might be able to actually decrease the debt itself.

[TheCount]

Yet another gaslighting among many.

[angelatc]

No matter how many times they get smacked in the nose with the rolled up newspaper of reality, Trump supporters find some reason to keep the faith and come right back for more.

I staggers the mind. Ron Paul still gets it.

[Anti Globalist]

I staggers the mind. Ron Paul still gets it.
And he will continue to always get it until the day he dies.

[angelatc]

And he will continue to always get it until the day he dies.

Breaks my heart that we couldn't sell it. I don't really have much hope any more.

[pcosmar]

Breaks my heart that we couldn't sell it. I don't really have much hope any more.

Watch and Pray.

I am an Observer.. Ron gave me some hope for a different path..

I observed that path being rejected.

[Anti Globalist]

Breaks my heart that we couldn't sell it. I don't really have much hope any more.
Well thats what happens when you live in a country where the majority of people don't believe in freedom. As long as people wake up in the morning knowing they have internet, food, car, house, etc, they have no worries whatsoever.

[kcchiefs6465]

Well thats what happens when you live in a country where the majority of people don't believe in freedom.
Fat and fed with circuses Trumps freedom.

[angelatc]

Well thats what happens when you live in a country where the majority of people don't believe in freedom. As long as people wake up in the morning knowing they have internet, food, car, house, etc, they have no worries whatsoever.

Yeah. Like they'll ever be satiated.

[Ender]

Watch and Pray.

I am an Observer.. Ron gave me some hope for a different path..

I observed that path being rejected.

Agree- and Ron Paul definitely opened my eyes.

[eleganz]

ooohhh the personal attack....I seem to have hit a major nerve here. You can pull out the libertarian measuring stick if you want but I have never defended my degree libertarianism nor do I ever intend to because I feel secure about my beliefs. Frankly, I thought you were above something as infantile as that. But I get it, you were embarrassed by my signature and you know its not going anywhere, so your veins are inflammed with eleganz blood right now.

BACK to the topic and I'm going to break it down for you so you can't run from it, even though you just literally did evade what I said, what is that, like the 4th time you ignored it? Anyway.


You invoked Ron Paul....fact

I told you, you're in no position to be invoking Ron Paul since you since to think his position on anonymous accusers is....a grotesque embarrassment. At least when you were called out on it, you were silent, super silent, big league silent. Evading posts where I specifically call you out for it....thats a fact too, isn't it?

And what do you do next? Attack me for not understanding libertarianism and somehow making it about Trump and his lies, which has nothing to do with Ron Paul's position on anonymous accusers.

Now do you want to debate whats at hand or do you want to keep making cheap shots at my understandings of libertarianism? lol.


For the record, I have never, even once led anybody on RPF to believe that Trump was pro-libertarian. Actually quite the opposite. I have always warned those on RPF that Trump was not, is not and never will be a libertarian candidate/president, nor did he even attempt to court our vote. So yea, sorry bud, you're wrong on that too.

And I guess that makes this the 5th time R3v 3.0 evaded my call out.

[devil21]

AFAIK, Trump never said that troops were being pulled out of Syria. It seems that was the resident internet Trump PR teams pushing that narrative. The actual case was moving troops away from the Turkish/Kurd conflict area and that bit of information wasn't a secret. If someone can post a direct quote attributable to Trump saying pulling troops out of Syria entirely I'd like to see it. I never saw that. Or at least not this time...

[Swordsmyth]

AFAIK, Trump never said that troops were being pulled out of Syria. It seems that was the resident internet Trump PR teams pushing that narrative. The actual case was moving troops away from the Turkish/Kurd conflict area and that bit of information wasn't a secret. If someone can post a direct quote attributable to Trump saying pulling troops out of Syria entirely I'd like to see it. I never saw that. Or at least not this time...
If the search feature was working I could find much more:


1190036836447641601

From the video at 16s. :up:


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by President Trump

<SYRIA GRAPHIC SHOWN>

We were supposed to be there for thirty days...

and now we're getting out.

Let someone else fight over this long blood stained sand.

[Swordsmyth]

AFAIK, Trump never said that troops were being pulled out of Syria. It seems that was the resident internet Trump PR teams pushing that narrative. The actual case was moving troops away from the Turkish/Kurd conflict area and that bit of information wasn't a secret. If someone can post a direct quote attributable to Trump saying pulling troops out of Syria entirely I'd like to see it. I never saw that. Or at least not this time...


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...72457811697664 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181172457811697664)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...72459325800448 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181172459325800448)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...72462291243008 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181172462291243008)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...72465772482563 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181172465772482563)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...72467676565505 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181172467676565505)

The United States was supposed to be in Syria for 30 days, that was many years ago. We stayed and got deeper and deeper into battle with no aim in sight. When I arrived in Washington, ISIS was running rampant in the area. We quickly defeated 100% of the ISIS Caliphate,.....


....including capturing thousands of ISIS fighters, mostly from Europe. But Europe did not want them back, they said you keep them USA! I said “NO, we did you a great favor and now you want us to hold them in U.S. prisons at tremendous cost. They are yours for trials.” They.....


.....again said “NO,” thinking, as usual, that the U.S. is always the “sucker,” on NATO, on Trade, on everything. The Kurds fought with us, but were paid massive amounts of money and equipment to do so. They have been fighting Turkey for decades. I held off this fight for....


....almost 3 years, but it is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars, many of them tribal, and bring our soldiers home. WE WILL FIGHT WHERE IT IS TO OUR BENEFIT, AND ONLY FIGHT TO WIN. Turkey, Europe, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Russia and the Kurds will now have to.....


...figure the situation out, and what they want to do with the captured ISIS fighters in their “neighborhood.” They all hate ISIS, have been enemies for years. We are 7000 miles away and will crush ISIS again if they come anywhere near us!

[Swordsmyth]

AFAIK, Trump never said that troops were being pulled out of Syria. It seems that was the resident internet Trump PR teams pushing that narrative. The actual case was moving troops away from the Turkish/Kurd conflict area and that bit of information wasn't a secret. If someone can post a direct quote attributable to Trump saying pulling troops out of Syria entirely I'd like to see it. I never saw that. Or at least not this time...


President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump) on Monday dug in on his decision to pull U.S. troops out of northern Syria as Turkey prepares an operation in the region, while members of his own party lined up to criticize the move.
Speaking to reporters in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Trump said he has "great respect" for the prominent Republicans who are urging him to reconsider (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/464635-gop-lawmakers-blast-trumps-syria-decision-as-grave-mistake-disaster-in-the) his strategy but that "it's time to come back home."
"We’ve been there for many, many, many years beyond what we were supposed to be. Not fighting. Just there. Just there. And it’s time to come back home," Trump said in his first public remarks since the shift was announced late Sunday.


"But I can understand the other side of it," he continued. "But if you go by the other side, that means we should never, ever come home."
The president lamented that the most difficult aspect of his job is writing letters to the families of soldiers killed overseas. He described writing to families of soldiers killed by mines or snipers, calling it "devastating."
"We’re willing to do what we have to do, but there has to be an endgame," he said. "And if you stay, it’s going to be the same thing. Eventually you’re going to have to leave."


Trump was asked Monday afternoon about the barrage of criticism that rolled in throughout the day from the likes of Graham, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (https://thehill.com/people/mitch-mcconnell) (R-Ky.) and former Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley (https://thehill.com/people/nimrata-nikki-haley), all of whom argued a U.S. retreat could harm relationships with allies and lay the foundation for a resurgence of ISIS.
He replied that "many people" strongly agree with his viewpoint. Sen. Rand Paul (https://thehill.com/people/rand-paul) (R-Ky.) has been among his most vocal cheerleaders, though most Republicans have called on Trump to rethink the move.
"I respect both opinions," he said. "The problem with the other opinion is when do we leave? When do we leave? We’re going to stay there forever?"
Trump also insisted he wasn't "siding with anybody" with the decision.
Asked about the Kurdish fighters, thousands of whom have died fighting alongside U.S. forces in the region and the remainder of whom would be vulnerable without U.S. support, Trump described them as a "natural enemy" of Turkey before arguing against prolonged American involvement.
Trump had doubled down and defended his strategy throughout the day. In tweets and comments in the Roosevelt Room, he chiefly argued that he campaigned on a pledge to end U.S. involvement in "endless wars" and that American forces should not serve as a global police force.

More at: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/464742-trump-defends-syria-move-its-time-to-come-home

...

[Swordsmyth]

AFAIK, Trump never said that troops were being pulled out of Syria. It seems that was the resident internet Trump PR teams pushing that narrative. The actual case was moving troops away from the Turkish/Kurd conflict area and that bit of information wasn't a secret. If someone can post a direct quote attributable to Trump saying pulling troops out of Syria entirely I'd like to see it. I never saw that. Or at least not this time...


Q Mr. President, are you confident that — are you confident that these gentlemen — I guess, mostly who are sitting around you — believe what you’re doing in Syria is the best idea at this point?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we’ve been in Syria for a long time.
And it was supposed to be a very short hit, and — hit on ISIS. But it didn’t work out that way. They never left. And they’ve been there for many, many years. And we are — we were down to very few soldiers in Syria. We had 50 in the region that you’re talking about — 50 soldiers — and they’ve been already moved out.

But we’ll see what happens with respect to a lot of different things. We’ve told Turkey — I spoke with President Erdoğan of Turkey, and I said, “Got to treat them good, and you got to take care of ISIS.” Don’t forget, we’ve captured — we defeated — this group, largely — defeated ISIS. One hundred percent of the caliphate. One hundred percent. And we wanted to do 100 percent. I was going to do this nine months ago, and we were not at 100 percent, but we were pretty close. Everyone said, “Can we get to 100 percent?” Now I get to 100 percent, and they say, “Well, maybe we could stay longer.” I say, “Well, when do we get out?” There’s got to be a time we get out. We have to bring our people back home.
And frankly, our great soldiers have been talking about this on the campaign. You go back three years ago and more, and you watch the speeches. We want to bring our soldiers back home. These are the endless wars.
And we’re not fighting; we’re policing, to a large extent. We’re policing in certain areas. We’re not police, we’re — these are fighters, great fighters; the greatest in the world. And that’s what they do.
So I’ve told President Erdoğan — I hope he’s going to treat everybody with great respect. You have to understand, they’ve been fighting various of the people that we were working with, and they — Turkey has been fighting them for many years. Somebody said hundreds of years. You had just mentioned to me yesterday, 200 years, maybe more.
At some point, we have to bring our people back home. And that’s what we’re doing. That’s what we’re doing.
Q Is it a firm decision, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: It’s always a firm decision. Last time I made a firm decision, but — and I said, “We’ll do it over a period of time.” We’ve been doing this, actually, over a period of time — over a very long period of time. And we’ve been working with the people in this room, and our soldiers have been coming back over that period of time.

More at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-briefing-military-leaders/

...

[Swordsmyth]

AFAIK, Trump never said that troops were being pulled out of Syria. It seems that was the resident internet Trump PR teams pushing that narrative. The actual case was moving troops away from the Turkish/Kurd conflict area and that bit of information wasn't a secret. If someone can post a direct quote attributable to Trump saying pulling troops out of Syria entirely I'd like to see it. I never saw that. Or at least not this time...


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181905659568283648

1181905659568283648


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181905661300559872

1181905661300559872

...

[Todd]

Sigh.

https://news.antiwar.com/2019/10/31/us-troops-armored-vehicles-arrive-at-east-syrian-oilfields/


Hundreds of US infantry and a number of armored vehicles have arrived in eastern Syria as part of a newly announced deployment, which is based around the new US military priority in Syria of controlling the eastern Syrian oilfields.

These forces are meant to deny Syria access to the Syrian oil, and as President Trump has recently indicated, will be staying there while the US starts taking the oil for themselves.

Some 500 US ground troops are currently involved, along with M2A2 Bradley vehicles. Tanks are also reportedly going to be deployed to the area, though it’s not clear any have actually arrived yet.

Estimates are that 700 to 900 US troops are going to remain in Syria under this plan, which is a minor decline from the 1,000 troops believed to be present when the US moved out of the north to facilitate the Turkish invasion. Ultimately, this means US troop levels aren’t dramatically changed, even though the military goals in the country have radically changed.

[juleswin]

According to the comedian Dannno, Trump just returned Syrian oil back to them. This is fake news :)

[enhanced_deficit]

Sigh.

https://news.antiwar.com/2019/10/31/us-troops-armored-vehicles-arrive-at-east-syrian-oilfields/

Hope you're not really surprised.
Minor public consumption zig zags and flip-flop statements to create ambiguity aside, MAGA's globalist top donors policy objectives have been visible for a long time.