Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, et al founded ISIS

[Tiny]

This is a fascinating piece by an investigative reporter who used to have a blog sponsored by the Guardian in the United Kingdom, a first rate newspaper, like the New York Times or Washington Post. He's a little to the left of Bernie Sanders but he's not a crack pot. He establishes that the U.S. led-coalition now fighting ISIS created ISIS in order to undermine the Assad regime in Syria:

https://medium.com/insurge-intellige...092#.yqbqlkl77

This occurred during the Obama administration, much of it during Obama's first term, when Hillary was Secretary of State.

While I don't like Trump for other reasons, he would appear to favor a return to the the "realist" approach to foreign policy, favored by George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, where your primary consideration is whether what you're doing is good for Americans. They weren't willing to spend billions and waste the lives of Americans and foreigners by, say, nation building in Lebanon or Iraq when they had the opportunity to do that. George W. Bush, and to a lesser extent Barack Obama, on the other hand got us into a ton of trouble by trying to promote democratic ideals in the Middle East and northern Africa. Hillary Clinton is cut from the same mold as George W. and Obama

Of course, Trump's ideas about NATO and nuclear weapons proliferation are potentially troubling, if you believe he might really follow through with them.

Apologies to Luke Wyatt, maybe I should have put this into your thread, but it had degenerated into a shit storm.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by Tiny

This is a fascinating piece by an investigative reporter who used to have a blog sponsored by the Guardian in the United Kingdom, a first rate newspaper, like the New York Times or Washington Post. He's a little to the left of Bernie Sanders but he's not a crack pot. He establishes that the U.S. led-coalition now fighting ISIS created ISIS in order to undermine the Assad regime in Syria:

https://medium.com/insurge-intellige...092#.yqbqlkl77

This occurred during the Obama administration, much of it during Obama's first term, when Hillary was Secretary of State.

While I don't like Trump for other reasons, he would appear to favor a return to the the "realist" approach to foreign policy, favored by George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, where your primary consideration is whether what you're doing is good for Americans. They weren't willing to spend billions and waste the lives of Americans and foreigners by, say, nation building in Lebanon or Iraq when they had the opportunity to do that. George W. Bush, and to a lesser extent Barack Obama, on the other hand got us into a ton of trouble by trying to promote democratic ideals in the Middle East and northern Africa. Hillary Clinton is cut from the same mold as George W. and Obama

Of course, Trump's ideas about NATO and nuclear weapons proliferation are potentially troubling, if you believe he might really follow through with them.

Apologies to Luke Wyatt, maybe I should have put this into your thread, but it had degenerated into a shit storm.

Trump wants NATO members to pay what they're supposed to pay. WTF is wrong with that?

[DSK]

Originally Posted by bambino

Trump wants NATO members to pay what they're supposed to pay. WTF is wrong with that?

Not a fucking damn thing! We are chumps to pay for everything like the fool no one liked unless he was buying the beer.

Speaking of a fool no one likes:

Assup is a stupid cocksucking pig. Hillary is his idol. They are both old, fat, unhealthy, lying sacks of shit. The only difference is, Assup sucks cock.Hillary never did.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by DSK

Not a fucking damn thing! We are chumps to pay for everything like the fool no one liked unless he was buying the beer.

Speaking of a fool no one likes:

Assup is a stupid cocksucking pig. Hillary is his idol. They are both old, fat, unhealthy, lying sacks of shit. The only difference is, Assup sucks cock.Hillary never did.

Hahahaha, I would have to venture to say there has never been a post more accurate than that. Since Libs think they are fact finders they should agree with you no matter how much it hurts, lol.


Jim

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by bambino

Trump wants NATO members to pay what they're supposed to pay. WTF is wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that. It's a great idea. If that's all he said I'd be cheering him on.

If Russia attacked the Baltic States, Trump said he'd come to their aid only after reviewing if those countries "have fulfilled their obligations to us."

The biggie, in terms of obligations, is that NATO countries agreed to each spend at least 2% of GDP on defense. Only the USA, Greece, Britain, Poland and Estonia actually do that.

Is Trump telegraphing the Russians that if he's elected they'd have an open invitation to invade Latvia and Lithuania? Probably not. Still it was a really stupid thing to say, unless perhaps his sympathies lie more with Vladimir Putin than with our NATO allies.

[dilbert firestorm]

NATO... personally I think its time we got out of NATO, make this organisation a truly european outfit.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

NATO... personally I think its time we got out of NATO, make this organisation a truly european outfit.

The time to rethink NATO was in the early 1990s. Bill Clinton missed the chance. He was better at fucking White House interns than strategic thinking. Bureaucracies always perpetuate themselves, even when their original mission is achieved. After the Cold War ended, NATO disarmed itself, but the bureaucrats stayed on and gradually added many of the former Soviet bloc states to the alliance. It's now over-extended with 28 members. However, we can't pull out when Putin is engaged in serious mischief-making. Again, the time to rethink it was under Clinton.

[CuteOldGuy]

We are out of money and cannot financially support the world anymore. Trump is talking tough. If the Baltic states are feeling some pressure, they would need to deal with him. I doubt Trump would just let Russia walk in and take over the Baltic. Hillary, however, has the backbone of a jellyfish, and her mind is deteriorating daily. She would happily give up the Baltic states, in exchange for a generous donation to the Clinton Foundation.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

She would happily give up the Baltic states, in exchange for a generous donation to the Clinton Foundation.

She's already given up 25% or more of our domestic uranium to them.





Why are the Hillary/Obama Democrats fretting about the Russians?

[i'va biggen]

We never like NATO, until we need some help invading some country.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Still it was a really stupid thing to say, unless perhaps his sympathies lie more with Vladimir Putin than with our NATO allies.

Follow the $$$.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Follow the $$$.

The "money" is being followed ... but it leads to Canada where the Clintons have it stashed .... I guess you might call it "off shore," although there's no "shoreline" per se. I guess that's why the Clintons (and Obaminable) oppose "tighter" borders. The Kerrys do also.