monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

My wild guess take on the Syria soap opera so far:

- Putin and Trump are playing us big time.
- The Russian warship now between the US destroyers and the Assad military base boils down to a pseudo escalation to take off some heat from the Trump Russia connection.
- The attack on the Syrian people is partially fault of the rebels and Putin that reacted to the S. Petersburg attack by bombing a rebel depot with Sarin. (No Sarin coming to Russia prompted Puttin discarding Assad)
- I don't buy it yet that Assad would commit Hara-kiri with the war already won.

Think about it this way. Since the Syrian conflict began in 2011, Assad has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians; a year ago, one estimate put the death toll at 470,000. The vast majority of them were killed with bombs and bullets. Trump’s belief up until now was that those deaths, as regrettable as they might be, were not enough to justify U.S. military action against the Syrian government.

But now everything has changed. Why? Because, we’re told, Assad used chemical weapons (not for the first time, but for the first time since Trump became president), and that is a step too far. Furthermore, it was the images of children killed with chemical weapons that supposedly sent Trump over the edge. The New York Times reports: “This time, though, a new American president was seeing the pictures and absorbing the horror.”

Just look at how Trump described it on Wednesday: “When you kill innocent children, innocent babies — babies, little babies,” he said, “that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line. Many, many lines.” But it’s not as though he just found out that children are dying in Syria.

We get to see those horrifying images precisely because they are less gruesome than what happens when someone is killed by conventional weapons. If a photojournalist takes a photo of a dead child whose limbs have been blown off by a bomb, you won’t ever see it (and neither will Trump). The newspaper won’t run it, and the evening news won’t show it, because editors consider those images too upsetting. But you will see a photo of a child killed by sarin gas, because her body is intact. The spread of those images will then reinforce the idea that these chemical weapons are worse than the conventional weapons that have killed many more in this war.

So, to repeat: Why are chemical weapons worse?...

4) The present apparent dissent within the Trump camp which seems to be pushing Bannon (and Bannonism) out of the limelight and replacing it with Kushner and a more traditional Republican worldview (in appearance, at least) to the foreground. My guess is that it was becoming increasingly evident through polling and other metrics that the course of the administration had to be changed dramatically in order to salvage Trump and electoral hopes in 2018.

Smart points from Paul Walman

What's so bad about chemical weapons?

You will have that (minimum universal income) coming whether you like it or not.

Tech and AI development in the next decades will ensure it pretty soon.

By the way, if you have a job now save money pal.

Lash wrote:

You do know about the competing pipelines running through Syria; whose pipeline (& partnership) Assad prefers...?

Anything that accuses America of wrongdoing over pipelines can safely be disregarded as propaganda.

Anyone else preparing for a positive jump in the CIC's poll numbers?

C.I.A. Had Evidence of Russian Effort to Help Trump Earlier Than Believed

The C.I.A. told senior lawmakers in classified briefings last summer that it had information indicating that Russia was working to help elect Donald J. Trump president, a finding that did not emerge publicly until after Mr. Trump's victory months later, former government officials say.

The briefings indicate that intelligence officials had evidence of Russia's intentions to help Mr. Trump much earlier in the presidential campaign than previously thought.... The former officials said that in late August — 10 weeks before the election — John O. Brennan, then the C.I.A. director, was so concerned about increasing evidence of Russia's election meddling that he began a series of urgent, individual briefings for eight top members of Congress, some of them on secure phone lines while they were on their summer break.

I wish it was wrong, but I believe that our Deep State runs our war machine for profit. We're the biggest robber barons on earth. Republicans and Democrats are subterfuge.

Anybody, including our own state actors, could've gassed Syrians.

Now that Trump attacked Syria, Russia is not too happy. What now?

Actually georgeob1, I did complain about the drone killings under Obama. Further, in my view , yes, Assad is a heinous murderer.

As far as solutions, this is much more difficult; however, in the case of Trump, it was clearly done for the purpose (in a typical demented way) to boost his approval ratings; which, is all he truly gives a hang about.

When the Electoral College elevated Donald Trump to the presidency, it conferred on him the awesome life-and-death powers that attend the office. It was inevitable that President Trump would use those powers sooner or later. Now he has. For the effects on the region, I refer you to the powerful piece by The Atlantic’s Andrew Exum. I’m concerned here with the effects on the U.S. political system. Seven seem most immediately relevant.

Trump’s Words Mean Nothing

If there was any one foreign policy position that Donald Trump stressed above all others, it was opposition to the use of force in Syria. Time has helpfully compiled Trump’s tweets on the subject dating back to 2013. For example:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
5:33 PM - 15 Jun 2013

These were not the idle thoughts of a distracted mind. Promises of no war in Syria were central to Donald Trump’s anti-Hillary Clinton messaging. Take, for example, to his interview with Reuters on October 26, 2016.

Why would Assad gas his people? Why would he beckon world intervention?

So if he had no reason to gas his people, think about who did.

This seems a lot like a false flag operation.

oralloy wrote:

Sturgis wrote:

I did complain about the drone killings under Obama.

Why? Dead terrorists are good terrorists.

We've killed a lot of women and children. Their sons and brothers are coming for you.