Trump discusses Iran, names Military Industrial Complex; doesn't want war.

[Swordsmyth]

again.

US threatens to take action over HTS al Qaeda claim that Syrian Army troops used chemical weapons
https://aml.ink/pNjeg

I would be disappointed if he bombed another empty air base after giving them enough warning to evacuate.
But that might be what he thinks is necessary to stay in office and keep Pence from invading Iran.

[PAF]

You're absolutely right in that he appears to be playing both sides. Despite what they regularly claim, his Trumpkin base seems content so long as he occasionally says what they want to hear, and the neocons are content so long as his actions maintain the status quo.

B-I-N-G-O and BINGO was his name-oh!

[Cap]

Overtime huh?

[Swordsmyth]

You're absolutely right in that he appears to be playing both sides. Despite what they regularly claim, his Trumpkin base seems content so long as he occasionally says what they want to hear, and the neocons are content so long as his actions maintain the status quo.

It would be so much better to replace him with someone who started several new shooting wars, then the forum could enjoy unity in condemning that person as the world went to hell.

[PAF]

I would be disappointed if he bombed another empty air base after giving them enough warning to evacuate.
But that might be what he thinks is necessary to stay in office and keep Pence from invading Iran.

As long as it keeps the MIC in business and we keep funding it. Just like funneling more people in to process them as our tax dollars keep funding them.

I knew there was a practical approach to everything ;-)

[juleswin]

The nuclear deal is gone, sanctions are in and people who are not mentally retarded believe he doesn't want war. If u believe that then I am really not sure how to help u.

[PAF]

Overtime huh?

Hey Cap, what do you think about SwordShillsLogic? Is he right? Does he get a pass? Or is placating?

[Swordsmyth]

As long as it keeps the MIC in business and we keep funding it. Just like funneling more people in to process them as our tax dollars keep funding them.

I knew there was a practical approach to everything ;-)

I know, let's start WWIII and kill millions of people, the end will justify the means because the nuclear fallout will alter the genetics of the survivors and create the new Soviet Anarchist Man.

[PAF]

I know, let's start WWIII and kill millions of people, the end will justify the means because the nuclear fallout will alter the genetics of the survivors and create the new Soviet Anarchist Man.

By your logic, China/Russia/Iran should bomb the HELL out of empty bases here in Amerika in order to prevent WWIII. How do think that would go over? Think Americans would be cool with that? I could see the first bomb being a surprise, by the second, you can bet everything that you own that every man, woman and child here would be screaming the sirens and calling for government to "do something", as well as take up arms themselves. Well the pro-2nd folks anyway.

[Swordsmyth]

By your logic, China/Russia/Iran should bomb the HELL out of empty bases here in Amerika in order to prevent WWIII. How do think that would go over? Think Americans would be cool with that? I could see the first bomb being a surprise, by the second, you can bet everything that you own that every man, woman and child here would be screaming the sirens and calling for government to "do something", as well as take up arms themselves. Well the pro-2nd folks anyway.

I don't want him to do it, I said that, I don't think he needed to do it last time either but it sure beat a full scale invasion that so many people claimed he was about to launch and that Pence would have.

[Cap]

The shill is doing his best to get out in front of any and all aspersions directed toward his god-emperor. He has to be very creative and very dishonest in orchestrating the spin. One of his fellow shylls must have called in sick, so he probably has to work some overtime...damn, all these threads to bump to push the talking points narrative. Poor guy.

[PAF]

I don't want him to do it, I said that, I don't think he needed to do it last time either but it sure beat a full scale invasion that so many people claimed he was about to launch and that Pence would have.

Don't you just love political expediency? Lesser of evil ALWAYS prevails, even though it is still EVIL. With full, undying support of the populace :-)

[PAF]

The shill is doing his best to get out in front of any and all aspersions directed toward his god-emperor. He has to be very creative and very dishonest in orchestrating the spin. One of his fellow shylls must have called in sick, so he probably has to work some overtime...damn, all these threads to bump to push the talking points narrative. Poor guy.

LOL I always enjoy another point of view, even when it lines up perfectly with mine. Good to have you here bro!

[JoshLowry]

I don't think RPF is pro war but there is a small contingency of Never-Trumpism here who cannot control themselves when he does something that aligns with what we support. Are you one of them?

No, I'm ok with Trump doing the right thing.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...00#post6723300

And just like that it's over — war averted, apparently, as the Pentagon announced Tuesday US defense posturing and military build-up in the Persian Gulf has thwarted potential attacks an Americans.
Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said Iran was forced to “put on hold” plans to harm American troops and their allies in the region:

“I think our steps were very prudent and we’ve put on hold the potential for attacks on Americans and that is what is extremely important,” Shanahan told reporters at the Pentagon, though without giving specifics.
He added that Iran was ultimately forced to "recalculate" its aggression.

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...t-attacks-hold

Trump's claim seems vindicated, maybe we should change the title back to what it was.

Lol which one of the mods changed the title?

I don't see every thread title on this forum being changed from "does" to "claims".

Title reverted. Stay tuned til next week...

[juleswin]

The shill is doing his best to get out in front of any and all aspersions directed toward his god-emperor. He has to be very creative and very dishonest in orchestrating the spin. One of his fellow shylls must have called in sick, so he probably has to work some overtime...damn, all these threads to bump to push the talking points narrative. Poor guy.

The shyll amplify what Trump says and never what he does. They also praise things like not starting wars even as he pushes more wars and extends old ones. I sorta admire these people because shylling for Trump has to be a very difficult task to do. This is the sort of stuff you need a propaganda minister for, someone who is an expert in PR.

[Cap]

The shyll amplify what Trump says and never what he does. They also praise things like not starting wars even as he pushes more wars and extends old ones. I sorta admire these people because shylling for Trump has to be a very difficult task to do. This is the sort of stuff you need a propaganda minister for, someone who is an expert in PR.

Yeah, he's just doing the job regular Americans won't do.

[juleswin]

Yeah, he's just doing the job regular Americans won't do.

You mean to tell me that the number 1 fan of the most pro Israel, neocon president is doing the job most patriotic America first Americans wouldn't do? I am shocked.

[Cap]

Maybe we should have him deported.

[PAF]

Maybe we should have him deported.

He did just nominate a "dirty blonde"... lol

[Cap]

Did he grab her by the pussy first?

[juleswin]

Maybe we should have him deported.

I am not saying he should be taken to Guantanamo bay but if that is what is takes to rid this country of traitorous globalist shylls? then so be it.

[Cap]

Maybe stick his @ss in an Ecuador embassy, shut off from the world for a decade or so.

[Ender]

Don't you just love political expediency? Lesser of evil ALWAYS prevails, even though it is still EVIL. With full, undying support of the populace :-)

Exactly- I said that through the campaign fiasco.

As for Iran, Trump has been after them since his campaign & I am sure he will not stop. He's the one that wanted out of the nuclear deal & he's absolutely in tune with the MIC on this.

[TheCount]

It would be so much better to replace him with someone who started several new shooting wars, then the forum could enjoy unity in condemning that person as the world went to hell.

[Swordsmyth]

Don't you just love political expediency? Lesser of evil ALWAYS prevails, even though it is still EVIL. With full, undying support of the populace :-)

Trump is the least of all possible goods and the lesser of two evils is often the best choice while you wait for a chance to choose good.

[RonZeplin]

Impeachment Should Be on the Table If Trump Bombs Iran

We’re told that the Trump administration’s brinksmanship on Iran stems from a power grab by President Donald Trump’s undeterrable national security advisor, John Bolton. And it’s true that Bolton has never met a “preventive” war he didn’t like and that there’s every reason to suspect him of scheming to create an excuse for one. But lately it’s getting hard to distinguish President Trump from “President Bolton.” “If Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran,” Trump rage-tweeted Sunday. “Never threaten the United States again!”

If the administration can’t be convinced to stand down, the House of Representatives should launch a preemptive strike of its own. They should credibly threaten to impeach the president if he goes to war without congressional authorization.

Waging war without legal authority is an impeachable offense, if anything is. Impeachment was designed to thwart attempts to subvert the Constitution; congressional control of the war power was one of that document’s core guarantees. “In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,” James Madison affirmed, “than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department.”

The first federal impeachment case, brought less than a decade after the Constitution’s ratification, centered on charges of unauthorized warmaking. In 1797, the House impeached Tennessee Senator William Blount for conspiring to raise a private army for “a military hostile expedition” against Spanish-held Louisiana and Florida, “in violation of the obligations of neutrality, and against the laws of the United States.” In the Founding era, usurpation of the war power was considered serious enough to merit the ultimate constitutional remedy.

No president has yet been impeached for illegal warmaking, but Richard Nixon came closest. In 1974, the House Judiciary Committee debated impeaching Nixon for conducting a secret bombing campaign in Cambodia “in derogation of the power of the Congress to declare war.” The article never made it into the final charges, possibly scuttled by Democratic leadership out of fear of revealing “that a few prominent members of their party had known about the secret bombing at the time.” As Congressman William Hungate put it afterwards: “It’s kind of hard to live with yourself when you impeach a guy for tapping telephones and not for making war without authorization.”

Current members of Congress should find it hard to live with themselves if they don’t do something to prevent the Trump administration from dragging us into an illegal and unnecessary war. Yet so far the congressional response has been limited to ineffectual grousing and the introduction of a few bills that are wholly inadequate to the task at hand.

Instead the House should consider passing a resolution “expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the use of offensive military force against Iran without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.”

The late, great Congressman Walter Jones, long one of the most jealous guardians of Congress’s power “to declare War,” proposed a similar measure during President Obama’s second term, when the administration was publicly contemplating airstrikes on Syria. Jones introduced a concurrent resolution stating that “except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress” is an impeachable offense.

https://www.theamericanconservative....mp-bombs-iran/

[Swordsmyth]

President Donald Trump said on Thursday he did not think additional U.S. troops are needed in the Middle East to counter Iran, casting doubt on a Pentagon plan to bolster forces in the region."I don't think we're going to need them. I really don't," Trump told reporters. "I would certainly send troops if we need them." If needed, "we'll be there in whatever number we need," he added.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-conf...174921100.html

[enhanced_deficit]

Strictly hypothetically, if a politician's top donor wanted to pursue war policy but the politician after taking his money does not pursue war, would that be political malpractice?

Can the donor sue the politician for taking the money but not delivering services?

[nikcers]

Strictly hypothetically, if a politician's top donor wanted to pursue war policy but the politician after taking his money does not pursue war, would that be political malpractice?

Can the donor sue the politician for taking the money but not delivering services?

"I’ve been thinking. When life gives you lemons? Don’t make lemonade.
Make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don’t want your damn lemons!
What am I supposed to do with these?
Demand to see life’s manager!
Make life rue the day it thought it could give me lemons!
Do you know who I am? I’m the man who’s going to burn your house down!
With the lemons! I’m going to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!"

[Cap]

Strictly hypothetically, if a politician's top donor wanted to pursue war policy but the politician after taking his money does not pursue war, would that be political malpractice?

Can the donor sue the politician for taking the money but not delivering services?

I do believe that President Bolton and the toady Trump's top donor are on the same page.