Dear Mr. and Mrs. Trump,
Thank you for enrolling your son in our program, and we are pleased to present our first quarter foreign policy assessment to you now. Over all, we are pleased with your Donald’s progress although, as you will see, there are some areas of significant concern. We will start with the bad news.
Constitutional Law (F)
We have been over this a number of times. Congress is the only entity that can declare war (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11). The president is the Commander in Chief once war is declared, but does not have the authority to start the whole shebang all by himself. Calling it something else doesn’t make it something else. Japan did not have the authority to call Pearl Harbor a limited strike, although it was, or to point out that they had put no “boots on the ground,” although that was also true.
Geopolitics (A)
China, Russia, the entire Middle East, and North Korea all have this in common—they don’t care about the niceties of the U.S. Constitution. All they care about is what is likely to happen to them and their causes if they do x,y, or z, and how quickly it might happen to them and their causes. After eight years of very predictable dithering for Obama-months, pronouncing things unacceptable as a prelude to accepting them, accompanied by hand-wringing in the State Department, all international plug-uglies now have to calculate in terms of a decisive response within hours. As an exercise in military theater, this was magnificent.
Maintaining the Base (C+)
The diehard supporters of the president did not vote for him so that he could land us in another hip-deep military quagmire in the Middle East. Indeed, many of them voted for him precisely because he wouldn’t do that. Many of them are disappointed and/or outraged. But this grade can be brought up if he shows over time that nation building is not going to be any part of this. If he uses the military simply to whack people from time to time, and not as the advance team for the construction of a Middle East sinkhole for trillions of dollars, his base will become decreasingly surly about this.
Destabilizing the Neo Cons (A)
The respectable Republican establishment is now torn between their deep distaste for this president, and the giddy excitement of having a president who will let someone like Assad have it. If this keeps up, they will be unable to generate sufficient levels of outrage over his latest 4 am Tweet if they have to keep going out in front of cameras to praise his decisive leadership as displayed in his 5 am Tweet.
Destabilizing the Left (A)
The left has put virtually all of its story board resources into establishing the narrative that the president is a Putin puppet. But Putin puppets don’t bring us to the brink of war with Russia by sending in a flock of Tomahawk missiles to rain down upon another Putin puppet. Putin puppets would show a bit more solidarity than that. This strike did not put this Syrian airfield out of commission for more than a day or so. But it does put certain other things out of commission, and perhaps for good.
Consistency (Incomplete)
As the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch shows, along with the triggering of the nuclear option, we may be on the road to removing this next inconsistency. But if air strikes are justified on Syria because of chemical attacks on infants, doesn’t this mean that air strikes on us would be justified because of our chemical attacks on unborn children? The grade here will rest almost entirely on the next Supreme Court nomination, which may come within a matter of months.
I find it very hard to believe that Trump fell for the gas attack false flag. I think that the truth is worse and that the Zionist/Neocon/Wahhabist alliance got to him.
Barney,
Do you have any good sources for the false flag? Who supposedly conducted it, CIA?
I agree that the standard story doesn’t pass the small test… but it is the bar one I have.
It looks like the Kushner wing will control Daddy.
Very tough to get any good data since there is no real media and everything coming out of there is literally partisan propaganda. Most likely scenario seems to be exactly what the Russians claim, a conventional strike on a site where chemicals or chemical weapons were being stored. I wouldn’t say that the films are completely faked in this case, as they appear to have been in others, but they do appear to be hammed up for propaganda purposes and don’t seem consistent with sarin.
They are, however, consistent with chlorine and apparently there’s been no evidence found of chemical weapons storage in the area. Now you can say that’s been covered up, but if there is no evidence to be found, then there is no evidence for that theory.
There has been a lot written about chem in syria by rebels and u.s. Leading up to this
Russia free, Amerika in chains
Yeah… Looks like the this is shaping up to be the 8th term of George ‘New World Order’ Herbert Walker Bush.
Why is there a small contingent of anti-semites on this board?
Being anti-Zionist, or just *not being* Zionist, does not equate to being “anti-semite”.
You’re right, and it should be possible to criticize Israeli government conduct, or our government’s support of Israel, without being accused of anti-semitism. However, in actual practice, anti-Zionism often comes hand in hand with a belief that America is being manipulated by the Satanic Jews who are responsible for everything wrong in the world. Or, that Israel was given to the Jews to shut them up about a nonexistent Holocaust–where, of course, Hitler never used chemical weapons.
Sean Spicer’s comment, even if an accident, is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. I doubt he actually meant anything close to Holocaust denial, but that’s not even the real problem–which is that he’s the speaker for the President and he said something so remarkably politically stupid.
I agree. I don’t think he intended to be offensive, to deny the Holocaust, or to say anything good about Hitler. His clarification and apology didn’t really help–as if Assad is worse because at least Hitler didn’t use airplanes, and that his victims were “innocent” (as opposed to the people in the “Holocaust Centers”?). I found myself feeling kind of sorry for him. He is too tone-deaf and inarticulate to be press secretary.
My interpretation: https://youtu.be/XfdJGrGfA_Y?t=9
There’s a lot more going on in the comments here than anti-Zionism, or non-pro-Zionism. Keep reading downward.
Yes, but there are quite a few loud and proud anti-semites on this board, they overlap quite closely with the anti-Black posters, and one common trait of anti-semites is to promote conspiracy theories blaming Jews for everything.
A secular Alawite with a long history of atrocities gasses his own people with clear documented evidence, and a poster with a long history of racism blames the Zionists.
Jonathan wrote: A secular Alawite with a long history of atrocities gasses his own people with clear documented evidence, and a poster with a long history of racism blames the Zionists. Jonathan shouldn’t forget that Bush and Cheney had “clear documented evidence” that there were WMDs in Iraq too. One doesn’t have to be anti-Semite to insist on patience with the evidence, or to at least be open to consider that Syrian rebel children are not the only ones eager to benefit from U.S. intervention to remove Assad. For instance, Western Europe is looking for an alternate energy supplier besides… Read more »
Saying that you will withhold judgment until you have better evidence is very different than saying the Zionists did it without an iota of evidence for that claim. A typical move of conspiracy theorists is to cite a hole or lack of evidence for the majority conclusion, but they feel they should be free to latch onto their own alternative conclusions without a lick of evidence and all sorts of holes. And I don’t believe for a second that America’s central concern is protecting children, or that America and other Western nations don’t have ulterior motives to their use of… Read more »
More errors than words right there
Anti-semitism has been the traditional position and teaching of the church for centuries. Philo-semitism is an American evangelical innovation.
Ashv, I would question that, but first, could you define what you mean by anti-semitism? Do you mean that the church has traditionally censured the Jews for what it sees as their stubbornness in rejecting Christ, or do you mean that the church has officially sanctioned the actual persecution of Jews by the civil authorities?
As far as I can tell, “anti-semitism” today means “criticising Jews for any aspect of Jewishness” or maybe even “criticising or disliking Jews for any reason at all”.
So yes, the chief charge against Jews in years past has been their stubbornness in rejecting the gospel and in perpetuating their false religion, as seen in John Chrysostom’s Homilies Against the Jews, Luther’s On the Jews And Their Lies, etc. Somehow this has been forgotten by American Christians.
In 1120 Pope Alexander III issued “Sicut Judaeis” (“As the Jews”) setting out official Vatican teaching on how Jews were to be treated. This drew on the work five hundred years earlier of Pope Gregory the Great. Alexander said: “[The Jews] ought to suffer no prejudice. We, out of the meekness of Christian piety, and in keeping in the footprints or Our predecessors of happy memory, the Roman Pontiffs Calixtus, Eugene, Alexander, Clement, admit their petition, and We grant them the buckler of Our protection. For We make the law that no Christian compel them, unwilling or refusing, by violence… Read more »
Re: persecution I would want to draw some distinctions. Short of wholesale murder, as in the Holocaust, most Christian nations, as a rule, tolerated and even enriched their Jewish minorities. But because society was seen as a theological construct, a non-Christian could not participate in many ordinary affairs. Naturally this tended to disadvantage Jews in various respects. I don’t know how you could go about increasing Medieval toleration for infidels without insisting that they exchange their whole understanding of the state for our view that it is secular and independent of metaphysics. Tough sell, especially given how ours seems to… Read more »
Jesus and Paul both clearly loved the Jews, so no, not invented by Americans. I do agree that anti-semitism has been around hundreds of years, Luther was one of the worst and I’ve seen it in some of the 4th-5th century Church fathers too. But, like anti-Black racism and slavery, something being around the church for a few hundred years doesn’t make it good. Isn’t that a primary claim of the Reformation? Though if I were to imagine the views of someone who chose circa-1700 traditions and worldviews over and above both more recent worldview and Scripture itself, I might… Read more »
Of course – but, like Chesterton’s fence, if you’re going to get rid of something old, you better have a good reason, and understand why it was there in the first place.
Is it too late to abort this big beautiful zionist baby? In other news planned providence clinic says the saline produced by Syrian Christians tears is most caustic/though wests analgia deceives some.
“Hey, look, a bird!”
For the first time in a long, long time, I actually feel confident about this military intervention. I think it’s the right action at the right time for the right reason.
I’m hopeful it is just the show of force we needed to show too, something that may actually prevent future problems.
You’re living dangerously, ME! You’re going to catch it from both the left and the right on this one!
Because one-off strikes have worked well like that so many times in the past.
Let’s put a woman in charge. How to kill us quicker
Good luck Assad.
How many Christians die in this regime change? Do the bodycount math you pathetic neocons
ART: (A+)
Family optics of daughter and passel of kids coming off Air Force One.
This is an image that recent lame Pepsi commercials can never compare with.
Extra points for style on the put together small children! ; – )
See min. 1:55 +
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LDt10ZpgWQ
what’s with the Jew hate/jealous in the comment sections everywhere? Ok, what if you were a Jew?
Most informed antipathy towards Jews stems from the fact that Jews tend to pursue the group interest of Jews at the expense of their host nations, and simultaneously denounce any other group pursuing their own interests.
If I were a Jew, I’d think about why Jews have been kicked out of cities and countries hundreds of times, and think about how to avoid that sort of negative attention in the future.
I think you wouldn’t be so virtuous as described in para 2 if you’re a Jew. You’d probably be para 1. hehe…
I’ll go you one better. No, he’s not a Jew, but he advocates for the exact behavior from his tribe for which he castigates the Jews. There’s a nasty word for that: hypocrite. He’ll call it patriotism.
I know you enjoy lying about me, but this one is pretty ridiculous.
I would never accuse you of hypocrisy, but how is advocating for the rights of white Protestant Christians different from any other kind of group advocacy?
It isn’t, especially. The difference is that I don’t deny the legitimacy of other groups pursuing their own interests.
So you don’t deny the legitimacy of liberals pursuing their own interests? What about Iran and muslims? You haven’t thought this one through, have you?
Liberalism and the cult of Mahound are false religions and it is in the interest of their adherents to repent and submit to Jesus.
I agree that Iranians have distinct interests from Americans.
I was thinking that if you and I had argued 100 years ago, you would have found my Catholic position a whole lot closer to your own. Something led me to read one of the early twentieth century popes on religious liberty, and I realized suddenly how much of my Catholicism is the product of being raised in a liberal, post-Vatican II church in a liberal country, and instructed by heavily intellectual priests and nuns. The formal teaching used to be: better to suppress error than let the easily influenced cast themselves into hell. Whoa!
Yeah, I’m starting to suspect that most of the consequences of the Reformation were bad – but Luther really was right and the Pope really was wrong on weighty matters of the faith. It would have been much better if the hierarchy had been able to exhibit repentance rather than opening the door to political and ecclesiastical chaos.
ashv wrote: It would have been much better if the hierarchy had been able to exhibit repentance rather than opening the door to political and ecclesiastical chaos. Indeed. The reformers were seeking to reform from within, not overthrow in revolution. At the recent Grace Agenda conference, Wilson emphasized that even the word Protestant signifies a positive, pro- testimony. They weren’t just protestants, they were pro-testifying Catholics. Yet for all that, there is no reason to give up on the possibility of repentance for Rome. The story isn’t over, and much good could result from a Pope brought under the authority… Read more »
LOL, no.
That’s sweet.
You’ve been reading Kevin McDonald again. How ought an individual Jew conduct himself so as to avoid negative attention? I would like to give my Jewish family members some pointers.
I haven’t actually read anything by Kevin MacDonald. If I had one piece of advice to give it would be “go to church”.
I don’t think that individual Jews are more likely than anyone else to call people racist unless they are confronted with actual evidence of prejudice. When I first met one of my new cousins-by-marriage, he told me that I did not understand what it was like to be part of an oppressed minority. Choosing my words carefully, I replied that I found it strange he had encountered much anti-Semitism working in high tech industry and living in a heavily Jewish LA neighborhood. He looked at me as if I were a moron and said it had nothing to do with… Read more »
I also have suffered, in a similar fashion,
for my devotion to 1960’s automotive technology! ; – )
What do you drive?
I am the second owner of a 1969 camaro.
It has a straight 6, 230, with 3 on the tree manual transmission, drums all around.
It has “astro” ventilation and “Strato” bucket seats!
People love that old girl! (a.k.a refined Lady)
I am thinking of naming her “Jilly” ! ; – )
It sounds very nice! I love the courtroom scene in “My Cousin Vinny” when the girlfriend is asked the correct ignition timing on a 1955 Bel-Air Chevrolet and she says, “Chevy didn’t make a 327 in ’55. The 327 didn’t come out till ’62, and it
wasn’t offered in a Bel-Air with a four-barrel carb ’til ’64. However,
in 1964 the correct ignition timing would be four degrees before top
dead center.” It made me want to stay home until I had memorized everything in the world to do with cars!
I have one Jewish friend who not only went to church; she converted to Catholicism and became a nun.
Jilly, to some degree, you could say Joseph’s brothers were “anti-semetic”. ; – ) Strange as it is, decent people can attract haters as much as awful people can attract haters. I have worked for some Jeish people and have some Jeish friends, so far as I know, we are all good with each other. While Ash’s “go to church” advice is not bad, my advice is “don’t be a jerk”, though that applies to everyone, not to any particular ethinc group. For instance, I don’t think of Chuck Schumer as “jewish”, I think of him as a jerk and… Read more »
What a nice world it would be if everyone took “don’t be a jerk” to heart!
If i were a jew-i wouldnnt.
(Be)…Done.
I thought of our Justin-Trudeau-is-not-gay discussion when I read this:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/02/entertainment/trudeau-matthew-perry-rematch/index.html
On the other hand, Barry Manilow is gay and came out of the closet about his gay marriage this week. Who knew that Manilow is gay? Not I. Next thing they’ll be telling me that Rock Hudson was gay.
Speaking of which, were you aware that 10% of American Jews are homosexual? That’s more than twice the rate in the general population.
I was not aware of that. I wonder if American Jews were less likely to conceal being gay, back in the day when people still were closeted. Do you personally think there is a genetic element? I used to think so, but orientation seems to be so fluid nowadays that it is hard to tell. I am tired of the Snowflake’s friends making huge, dramatic announcements and then telling me a year later that they were mistaken.
In general I expect everything is about half and half inherited vs learned.
I think that, for women, learning plays a larger role than heredity. Women seem to flip in and out of it depending on their circumstances. Or they were never really gay in the first place.
Are you serious!? Or are you just too credulous? How do you know 10%?
I just googled it, and it seems to be true.
http://lilith.org/articles/coming-out-in-jewish-family/
I think that, among the non-Orthodox, Jewish families might be inclined to be more accepting of a gay kid. On the other hand, there is pressure to produce grandchildren!
could be fake news.
http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2012/07/jews-more-than-twice-as-likely-to-be.html
Could be. But it was mentioned on other sites as well.
I am infinitely credulous, and never know what to believe. You’ve probably heard of the fuss that’s been made of Disney’s new movie, the live action “Beauty and the Beast.” Disney hyped it as having its first openly gay scene, and some conservatives have boycotted it as a result. I saw the movie with my daughter, and when it was over I had to ask her which scene was supposed to be gay!
This because public in 2013 (not surprisingly) when he entered into the legal marriage which is, after all, a public act. I remembered it from then and had a “What the heck this happened years ago” moment when this hit my Facebook last week. This latest non-news news just seems to be drumming up publicity to put a new spark in his career, or something.
You’re putting the cart before the horse. Jewish people have been persecuted for millenia. They therefore do whatever they can to protect themselves. And besides, we all look after Number One. Enough of the anti-semitism.
And they’ve all been completely innocent in every single case where they were persecuted, right?
I don’t plan to be any less anti-semitic than Jesus.
The only problem I see with taking Jesus as your exemplar there is (1) He was divine and incapable of sin; and (2) He was a Jew criticizing the conduct of some of His own people. I’m not sure that this is a “Go and do thou likewise” kind of moment.
Talmudic Judaism is a self-conscious continuation of the tradition of the Pharisees. I don’t think any of Jesus’ criticisms of their beliefs and practice are less applicable today.
Okay, but Jesus’ s harsh words were directed against Pharisee leaders. Of the people I have ever encountered who do not like Jews, they are not willing to make this distinction. They do not say, “I have no problem with my Jewish friends and neighbors; they’re fine people, but I wish they were not putty in the hands of evil rabbis and the Elders of Zion.” On the contrary, they seem only too willing to take the harshest condemnations (“Hypocrites! Whited Sepulchres! Thieves and Vipers”) and apply them to ten-year-old children who surely, by any standard, are too young to… Read more »
I mostly had Mark 7:1-12 in mind. Anyway, you’re going to blame Magnus Hirschfeld on “constant persecution and oppression”? I don’t buy it. I’m certainly not going to claim that all persecution of Jews was justified, but it’s just as unreasonable to claim that there were no good reasons for expulsion of Jews. Isabella expelled the Jews because, among other things, the Inquisition was ineffective at keeping them from practicing their false religion in secret. Naturally, most people who take the Jews’ side in these discussion will point out that Jewish mercantile and financial success stirred up envy and strife,… Read more »
So Hirschfield’s unpleasant preoccupations were the result of his being Jewish? How then do you explain his partner Havelock Ellis? Or the very non-Jewish Richard von Krafft-Ebing? Or Alfred Kinsey, who despite rumors one finds on anti-Jewish websites, was the son of devout Methodist parents?
This is my problem with the kind of thinking that looks for bad people and then attributes their badness to their Jewish ancestry. We are supposed to think that Hirschfield represents the eternal Jew. We are not supposed to think that Ellis, Kinsey, and Krafft-Ebing represent Christians of northern European descent.
Please don’t misunderstand me – I regard Yankees as a more implacable threat to the health and safety of my family and community.
No, enough of the jewish anti-japhethism.
Not even a word for it, why is that?
Welcome Back, Tim!
It’s been too long; so glad we didn’t have to wait until the resurrection of the righteous for your next advent. :)
Dont blackmail the goyim, itll be better. Otherwise, game on
I simply don’t understand this. The Jews I know are a very diverse group. Even enthusiastic support for the state of Israel can no longer be taken for granted among the Jews I know. Intermarriage has significantly weakened Jewish identity, so one would think it would be welcomed among people who think Jews all share unlikable traits. Yet it isn’t. I do think it is often based on irrational envy–the sort that is directed at Asian immigrants when their hard working children get into medical school and ours don’t. But I find it odd that often the people who attach… Read more »
Uh oh Did someone spell j e w?, the MAtzaTRIX is here to check up on you
You are even more elliptical than usual.
I know. It’s bizarre. For me, it’s often psychological. Most of the anti-semitic commentators are deeply inadequate people who need someone to blame.
Kushner, Mossad? Epstein connected. Epstein a dirty pedophile blackmailer from back in the day. Isreal specializes in blackmail
A much more balanced appraisal than I’ve seen from most people. I can’t say military strikes in the Middle East thrill me, but I’m not going to be emotionally engaged about this sort of thing until it’s obviously turning into another Iraq debacle.
Ultimately none of this matters so long as the wall gets built.
Germany: not a debacle. (USA still there.)
Japan: not a debacle. (USA still there.)
South Korea: not a debacle. (USA still there.)
Gitmo: not a debacle. (USA still there.)
Afghanistan: not a debacle. (USA still there.)
Iraq: is a debacle. (USA not there in the same sense as the above.)
I smell B.O.
Ignoring the terrible things that happened in every one of those conflicts, in what sense do you NOT see Iraq as a debacle? Did we get in and out with limited forces like we said we would? (Remember, GW fired a general for saying that it would take as many troops as it eventually took.) Did we bring freedom to the Iraqi people? Did we find Saddam’s WMDs? (I mean ones that posed a danger to us like we claimed he had, not the old degraded ones that we had sold him ourselves in the 1980s and then hid from… Read more »
In what way does ‘is a’ mean ‘not a’?
J’, any number of bad things could have happened in Germany or Japan, had we left too early.
B.O. “Left” Iraq, hence let it slip, and now we are back in Iraq, having lost the previous gains that B.O. Squandered for no good reason.
That ISIS has any territory at all is the fault of B.O. And thinking like yours on this issue.
A) I don’t think U.S. presence in Japan or Germany is the lynchpin keeping those countries from destablizing.
B) Playing whack-a-mole with select midle east ‘dictators’ is not a good policy.
Yes, “select” is the issue.
All mole-like dictators can benefit from a good and proper whacking!????
Come to like of it, “mole-like” former Presidents and their NSA co-conspirators would benefit from a good and proper whacking as well! ????????????
“All mole-like dictators can benefit from a good and proper whacking!”
That would turn into eleminating any head of state we don’t like, which is not a good plan.
Which dictators do we like? ; – )
The USA has a long history of supporting various dictators it likes. I’m thinking, for example, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Egypt, Qatar, Rwanda, etc. Wikipedia lists 24 authoritarian governments currently supported by the USA. Historically, of course, you can come up with dozens more. Heck, why do you think that Trump’s latest “Muslim ban” included Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Iran, and Syria (governments we are not friendly with), but ignored Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the UAE….even though those are the actual countries that the most significant terrorists on USA soil came from? It’s because those countries are run by… Read more »
Don’t Bernie Sanders and Maxine Waters count as “despots” too??
Bernie at least would like to hold the dictatorship of the proletariat!
; – )
Xi Jinping and Salman bin Abdulaziz. Of course by we I mean the U.S. government.
Actually, no, not even close. First off, Isis was created by the invasion of Iraq. It was formed in American prisons, primarily from leadership that were a combination of disposed Iraqi military officers and foreign jihadis (many of whom were veterans of the US-supported Afghanistan conflict). And mandy of their foot soldiers were traumatized, bitter men growing up occupied and without hope in a war zone. This has been verified repeatedly. Here are a couple quotes from imprisoned former Isis soldiers and retired US General Doug Stone: “At the end of the interview with the first prisoner we ask, “Do… Read more »
Whoops J’. wrong again. I guess I should not have said “thinking”. I should have said “liberal bias”. “Bush, as discussed on “The Kelly File,” made the remarks in the White House briefing room on July 12, 2007, as he argued against those who sought an immediate troop withdrawal. “To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States,” Bush cautioned. He then ticked off a string of predictions about what would happen if the U.S. left too early. “It would mean surrendering the future of… Read more »
“A” dad, Bush HIMSELF signed the agreement for the troop withdrawal in November 2008, 16 months after making the 2007 statement you quoted. There was no “immediate troop withdrawal” in 2007. The withdrawal happened in 2011, and it occurred due to an agreement between Bush and the Iraqi government. Your quote has no relevance at all because it was a completely different situation, otherwise Bush himself wouldn’t have signed off on it. Again, you are really engaging in partisan hackery here. BUSH, not Obama, made that troop withdrawal agreement, so to act like Bush would be against it because of… Read more »
“Though President Obama says combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq, American troops are nevertheless returning in some capacity. The president on Wednesday announced an expanded airstrike campaign against the group in Iraq and Syria, and is sending hundreds more U.S. military personnel into Iraq. Some lawmakers and analysts say this could have been avoided if the Obama administration had left a residual force in Iraq, or at least had responded sooner to ISIS’ gains in northern Iraq over the past year. Bush, before he left office, signed an agreement setting the stage for U.S. troops to… Read more »
But if you believe that, then why did you blame Obama for Isis having territory when Isis gained their initial territory in Syria, not Iraq? Why were you using Bush’s quote about withdrawing troops in 2007 as if he were referring to 2011, if you knew that Bush was the one agreeing to withdraw troops in 2011? Why did you blame Obama for Bush’s decision? And are you aware that from June 2009 to December 2011, Obama kept MORE troops in Iraq than Bush had wanted to keep? Yes, Obama campaigned on getting America out of Iraq because the American… Read more »
George, Bill Clinton simply does not have personal integrity, no matter how much you insist otherwise. The USA can always apply force anywhere, and it does so, typically with drone strikes. Obama wanted an “optic” that the USA was “out” of Iraq, so B. O. Did not keep enough forces in Iraq, and did not apply enough force from outside of Iraq to keep some measure of stability. Conversely, the Korean Peninsula is as stable as it is, because the US has never retreated from its obligations there. Oh! And what US political party do you think I am a… Read more »
An “A” for geopolitics, Doug. Really? Mr Trump, who doesn’t know what happened in Khan Sheikhoun on Tuesday, because there hasn’t actually been an investigation and the assembling of what is quaintly known as “evidence”, lashed out like the wild, unhinged tough boy megalomaniac he is. He has proved himself to be completely unpredictable, and if you think that this is likely to make Russia, China and Iran more wary, you are right, but not in the way you think. They will already be drawing up their own plans (already happening in fact) to prepare themselves for the Orange menace,… Read more »
One incident and you say they have “successfully neutered him”? This might be true, but it might not. You know what they say about extrapolating from a single data point…
Nope, not from a single data point at all. Taking out Flynn was data point number one in the Deep State coup against him. He capitulated and they won. Forcing Bannon out of the National Security Council was the second. 2-0 to the neo-Trots. Clearly they were giving Mr Trump a choice: do our bidding, or you’re next. Unfortunately, like the spineless goon he is, he capitulated and did their bidding, the results of which were an irrational lashing out with 59 Tomahawks, against a sovereign state, 48 hours after an incident which his government hadn’t had the common decency… Read more »
Bannon wasn’t removed from the National Security Council.
I think you’re just ready to believe bad news. Be patient.
Call it what you will. Doesn’t it strike you as odd that he was “removed”/”recused”/”stood down”/”resigned”/”reassigned” so soon after being placed there? This has nothing to do with being “ready to believe bad news”, but everything to do with a realistic appraisal. Let me come at it from a different angle. Mr Trump had absolutely no reason to order this strike. For one, the notion that Assad was behind this event is highly improbable. Both the US and Russia oversaw the destruction of Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons between 2013-2016. This of course doesn’t rule out the possibility that they… Read more »
I regret that I have but one Upvote to give for your comments.
Everyone is jealous of ppl who gotta have their own state; esp if they had for thousands of years…, does that explain zionist war on Syria?
Pastor Wilson, do you see anything in Donald Trump’s record that tells you that he wouldn’t partner with someone with one object and then stab them in the back the next day if he felt like it? Because two wives and a host of former business partners and contracted employees have made quite clear that stabbing his partners in the back isn’t really against his personal morality. Considering especially that Trump just went back on everything he said about such strikes in 2013, heck, things he said to the American people during the election in 2016, it doesn’t seem unlikely… Read more »
Justin Trudeau would not throw his mother under a bus.
&action=click
I don’t think Trump has any fixed principles, good or bad.
Greed, self-interest, and a kind of childish vanity which, I think, makes him dangerous. If he cared for admiration and affirmation only from virtuous people, we would be better off. But people with good principles would have to tell him when he is wrong, and I don’t think his vanity would allow him to listen.
I can’t find the post you wrote that I wanted to respond to, so I will do it here. Am I stating your position correctly if I say that you believe the only valid purpose of incarceration is to protect society from those who are so damaged (or wicked) that they behave violently? And that deterrence and retribution are not valid purposes? I tend to agree that deterrence might not work. I think the threat of a criminal prosecution and prison time works best on the kind of people who are least likely to commit crimes–people like me. Less rational… Read more »
The comment you’re looking for is here: https://dougwils.com/s7-engaging-the-culture/retreat-commitment-writ-large.html#comment-3246063755 No, I think that deterrence and rehabilitation are also valid purposes in addition to protecting society. The only one that I think is invalid (especially for Christians) is retribution. I’ll reiterate, though, that I haven’t thought about its particular application in terms of prison sentences as much as other topics, and think it’s not an easy one to directly apply Scripture to. My issues with retribution have to do with a thrust I see in Jesus’s gospel towards how we are called to approach “judgment” and “sinners”. A couple verses for example.… Read more »
Jonathan wrote: Thus, there is still a place for Christian involvement in the justice system, but it is in the pursuit of rehabilitation, prevention, and deterrence. Or in other words, mercy and the protection of the weak. Not retribution/vengeance. Apparently Jonathan has contemplated Romans 13 after all, but he seems to have come to a strange conclusion that the civic magistrate is a minister of “rehabilitation, prevention, and deterrence”, and “mercy”, rather than of God’s actual wrath. When the civic magistrate isn’t swinging the sword of God’s wrath for rehabilitation (and feeding and educating the poor, and not so poor)… Read more »
Do you really believe that “whoever sheds human blood, by humans their blood shall be shed” is meant to be some sort of command? Don’t you notice that, taken literally, it would imply that it is necessary to execute the executioner? The verse doesn’t work logically to support your argument at all. If retribution and vengeance are so categorically ungodly and unholy, why is Jonathan not objecting to God’s practice of them? Katecho, I appreciate that you’re quoting me like I asked you to, but the things you quote me saying still have to match the things you claim I’m… Read more »
I don’t see that it is *obvious* that Romans 12:9 to Romans 13:10 is one continuous topic, and I can make sense of Romans 13:1-10 without viewing it that way, but okay, plausibly it can be read that way. It really doesn’t change the import of Romans 13: 1-5. Christians are to submit in view of the good that God-ordained government does, and that good involves a sword and wrath. If it is not a command to governing authorities it is a description of God’s purpose for them and expectation of them.
Indeed, this is some pretty hardcore spin in favor of someone who Wilson claims to not even like or support.
“Even if this isn’t just staged with Russia to draw heat off Trump…”
Kind of my take on the whole matter. That, or to distract from the administration’s domestic defeats and disorder. The irony is everyone might otherwise be talking more about Gorsuch’s confirmation, which is one of Trump’s few wins. Can’t even get the timing right.
Pastor Wilson, now that reports are out stating that US-backed forces have suspended anti-Isis attacks in Syria because they’re still not sure how Syria/Russia are going to respond and are waiting for further events….how you feeling about that “A” grade that you gave Trump in geopolitics? From your perspective of the geopolitics of the region, would you consider a falling back in the war against Isis to be an acceptable tradeoff for an increase in hostilities with Syria? The American-led task force that is battling the Islamic State has sharply reduced airstrikes against the militants in Syria as commanders assess… Read more »
I think Trump truly wants to make America great again, but only to the degree that it also makes him appear to be great.
I didn’t vote for Trump, but there were some things about the guy that gave me hope. Like the fact that he gave the warmongering neo-cons (McCain, Kristol etc.) the fantods. (Thanks for that word, Doug, BTW … )
But you give him an “A” in “Destabilizing the Neo-Cons”?
Launching an illegal attack against a sovereign Middle East nation that poses no immanent threat to the US, followed by Neo-Cons acknowledging the attack’s illegality, but approving it anyway? http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/beware-the-good-intervention/
Trump’s political jiu jitsu not so good, I think.
Somewhat funny, I did vote for Trump, very little about the man giving me much hope, driven by instincts more than anything else.
So here I am, long disapproving of most military intervention, feeling quite uncharacteristically content with this latest show of force. Right action, right place, right time. Truly an odd thing indeed, very unusual for me.
“Right action, right place, right time.”
By what moral standard?
Based on what evidence?
North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 11, 2017
Looks like the media was right all along about Trump.
“The goal is to destabise Stria” for greater ‘israel’ -Spicer. http://russia-insider.com/en/goal-destabilize-syria-finally-some-honesty-white-house/ri19548 Finally someone in wh too stupid to lie
I would say that he misspoke, but the actions clearly weren’t meant to stabilize Syria. I wonder exactly at what moment Trump decided that destabilizing Syria would be the best idea, considering that he’s been attacking Obama and claiming Obama was about to do such a thing for at least four years.
Questions….. the next SCOTUS pick will be open probably by mid-summer. If PDJT picks Bill Pryor to replace Kennedy the shrieking and pressure from the establishment will be worse than Bjork. Collins and Murkowski will cave and the pressure on McCain (for one) will be unrelenting. It would only take 3 R’s to torpedo a SCOTUS pick like this as it could very well end or substantially curtail Roe. Are all of us prepared to get their Senators to stand firm? Will the Christians in Arizona step up? Would a backroom deal to deliver Assad’s head on a platter to… Read more »
All these cz’s and gate keepers witch hunting for kosher only comments; if you dont see zionism as the worst kind of blasphemy then your the one in need of salvation!
Well said Doug!
Rex Tillerson who came in from nowhere is a great appointee “because he knows Putin so well” ..