“Criminal Neocons” ripped by leftwing journalist on Tucker Carlson show

[Tom Paine 1949]

Today I watched Trump’s son-in-law, top advisor & international “peacemaker” Jared Kushner on CNN lying shamelessly about how the Trump Administration has been getting us out of “endless wars” in the Middle East — where he has in fact increased our military footprint in the last three years.

Kushner was interviewed by famous liberal reporter Fareed Zakaria, who said not a word exposing this lie. Nor were there any hard questions put by Zakaria to Kushner about Trump’s foreign policies in the Middle East or elsewhere. The Democrats are ceding this and many other important issues to the Trump campaign, and may very well lose the election as a result.

Here is a more honest interview in which the popular right wing Tucker Carlson gives a chance to leftwing journalist Anya Parampil to rip into the “criminal neocons” of both the Biden and Trump camps. What do you think about this short interview?

The Grayzone's Anya Parampil rips "criminal neocons" in Biden & Trump camps

 

[Papageorgio]

Today I watched Trump’s son-in-law, top advisor & international “peacemaker” Jared Kushner on CNN lying shamelessly about how the Trump Administration has been getting us out of “endless wars” in the Middle East — where he has in fact increased our military footprint in the last three years.

Kushner was interviewed by famous liberal reporter Fareed Zakaria, who said not a word exposing this lie. Nor were there any hard questions put by Zakaria to Kushner about Trump’s foreign policies in the Middle East or elsewhere. The Democrats are ceding this and many other important issues to the Trump campaign, and may very well lose the election as a result.

Here is a more honest interview in which the popular right wing Tucker Carlson gives a chance to leftwing journalist Anya Parampil to rip into the “criminal neocons” of both the Biden and Trump camps. What do you think about this short interview?

The Grayzone's Anya Parampil rips "criminal neocons" in Biden & Trump camps

Does it remind you of Democrats claiming that the riots are peaceful protests?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Here is this radical anti-American and former columnist for Russia Times in action:


Anya Parampil
@anyaparampil
·
Jan 4

An honor to stand w the people of DC as they resist US war on Iran from within the belly of the beast! I spoke to the crowd about my recent trip to Syria & why Maj. General Soleimani was considered a hero in the region: he led the Resistance Axis against US imperial aggression


Yes, let's support a terrorist while calling our country evil and imperialistic.

 

[Markle]

Today I watched Trump’s son-in-law, top advisor & international “peacemaker” Jared Kushner on CNN lying shamelessly about how the Trump Administration has been getting us out of “endless wars” in the Middle East — where he has in fact increased our military footprint in the last three years.

Kushner was interviewed by famous liberal reporter Fareed Zakaria, who said not a word exposing this lie. Nor were there any hard questions put by Zakaria to Kushner about Trump’s foreign policies in the Middle East or elsewhere. The Democrats are ceding this and many other important issues to the Trump campaign, and may very well lose the election as a result.

Here is a more honest interview in which the popular right wing Tucker Carlson gives a chance to leftwing journalist Anya Parampil to rip into the “criminal neocons” of both the Biden and Trump camps. What do you think about this short interview?

The Grayzone's Anya Parampil rips "criminal neocons" in Biden & Trump camps

MOD EDIT - NO flaming/insulting/or putdowns in CDZ.

President Obama, who hoped to sow peace, instead led the nation in war
By CHRISTI PARSONS AND W.J. HENNIGAN
JAN. 13, 2017
[...]
U.S. military forces have been at war for all eight years of Obama’s tenure, the first two-term president with that distinction. He launched airstrikes or military raids in at least seven countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.

Yet the U.S. faces more threats in more places than at any time since the Cold War, according to U.S. intelligence. For the first time in decades, there is at least the potential of an armed clash with America’s largest adversaries, Russia and China.
[...]

President Obama, who hoped to sow peace, instead led the nation in war

President Obama came to office vowing to end America's foreign wars and take the country off its permanent war footing. He leaves a very different legacy as he prepares to hand his commander-in-chief responsibilities to Donald Trump.

www.latimes.com

Then there is the huge Caliphate that failed former President Barack Hussein Obama surrendered to ISIS.

As you know, President Donald Trump has reduced this ISIS Caliphate footprint to ZERO.

 

[Olde Europe]

Silly.

So, Colin Powell, the man who regrets nothing more about his life than having fallen for the Bush-Cheney Iraq scam, is now the poster boy for the so-called liberal neocons, and a guarantee for similar monstrosities emerging from the upcoming Biden administration. One has to be the very incarnation of stupid to believe that.

Anya Parampil. From "The Grayzone." Joining Tucker Carlson for a world-summit of stupid and mendacious. I should have been warned to stay well clear of that.

Biden will be the head of the empire. Filling that role, he will probably make decisions I won't like. A neocon? Naw. Biden likes to talk to people, and he isn't one of those benighted nitwits who wouldn't recognize any place in the world unless they have it in the cross hairs.

Yeah, but "a jobs program for washed-up neocons" has a certain charm. It doesn't conceal the malignancy, mendacity, and vacuity of it all.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

It is almost impossible today to get honest specific numbers of overseas U.S. troops. The Pentagon in 2018 decided to no longer release this information annually. There also has been a continuing increase under Trump, begun during Obama’s Presidency, in the use of private military “contractors” as well as secret Special Forces bases all over the world. These latter go almost totally unreported, even to Congress.

DNC Democrats, for example Kamala Harris, voted against even a token 10% reduction in military expenditures recently proposed in the Senate. Below are a few excerpts from a report by the well connected Establishment research center, Chatham House, presenting the situation as it existed in late 2018 when some Pentagon statistics were still being revealed.

While there have been small reassignments of U.S. troops (as from Germany to Poland — closer to Russia’s borders) and from the border with Turkey in Syria to other parts of that devastated and U.S. sanctioned country (to hold SYRIAN oil wells), there have been NO overall reductions of U.S. overseas military personnel in this region or around the world.

All this despite the fact that Persian Gulf Oil no longer holds anything like its previous strategic importance to the U.S.

***

“Despite President Trump’s criticism of major elements of the US military’s presence in the Middle East, US troop levels have increased since he took office...

“That President Trump has proven unwilling to or incapable of altering America’s military policy in the Middle East – all the while decrying it publicly and repeatedly – demonstrates the policy’s bipartisan political endorsement, as well as the unspoken approval of Pentagon officials.... Thus, the status quo Middle East strategy that President Trump inherited remains largely in place to this day, albeit with a slightly larger military footprint.

“It is important to recognize that the number of forces deployed in Middle Eastern countries, including those on active duty, National Guard and Reserves, and DOD civilians grew significantly – by nearly one-third – in mid-2017.... In April 2018, it became impossible to know how many troops are presently in the region. For reasons that were never fully explained, the Pentagon unexpectedly stopped releasing US troop data...”

— US Military Policy in the Middle East: An Appraisal

Below are few other interesting Establishment articles, showing that the Trump Administration has failed completely in bringing U.S. soldiers back to our own shores. As I wrote, despite popular illusions, there are today more troops and more secret U.S. military personnel abroad than there were when Trump won election in 2016 — and both the DNC and MIC seems to like that fact:

Trump Didn’t Shrink U.S. Military Commitments Abroad—He Expanded Them
WSJ News Exclusive | Trump Administration Considers 14,000 More Troops for Mideast
Trump administration challenged to reveal troop levels in war zones
Despite Vow to End ‘Endless Wars,’ Here’s Where About 200,000 Troops Remain

 

[Olde Europe]

It is almost impossible today to get honest specific numbers of overseas U.S. troops. The Pentagon in 2018 decided to no longer release this information annually. There also has been a continuing increase under Trump, begun during Obama’s Presidency, in the use of private military “contractors” as well as secret Special Forces bases all over the world. These latter go almost totally unreported, even to Congress.

DNC Democrats, for example Kamala Harris, voted against even a token 10% reduction in military expenditures recently proposed in the Senate. Below are a few excerpts from a report by the well connected Establishment research center, Chatham House, presenting the situation as it existed in late 2018 when some Pentagon statistics were still being revealed.

While there have been small reassignments of U.S. troops (as from Germany to Poland — closer to Russia’s borders) and from the border with Turkey in Syria to other parts of that devastated and U.S. sanctioned country (to hold SYRIAN oil wells), there have been NO overall reductions of U.S. overseas military personnel in this region or around the world.

All this despite the fact that Persian Gulf Oil no longer holds anything like its previous strategic importance to the U.S.

Most assuredly, the use of “private military contractors” did not begin under President Obama. That began long before, and was ramped up considerably under Bush, the Lesser, during his Iraq adventure.

Let it be said as clearly as I can: Much as I love Sen. Sanders, he's also an asshole at times. His progressive pinky fully erect, he proposes a budget amendment forcing a massive 10% cut to the Pentagon budget. He knew full well it had not a hint of a chance to pass, but he has re-established his credentials while exposing a division in his own camp, immediately exploited by the execrable McConnell:

McConnell accused Democrats of trying to “decimate the defense budget” and chided Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., for throwing Sanders his support.

“The Democratic leader, who in almost every floor speech tries to accuse this administration of being too soft on America’s adversaries, wants to literally decimate our defense budget to finance a socialist spending spree,” McConnell said.​

Raising his own profile at his own camp's expense. With self-serving assholes like these as friends, who needs enemies? And that's before we consider what proper budgeting would actually look like, namely, working out a new defense strategy, and THEN going over the Pentagon budget and cutting what's no longer needed. Since changing the U.S. defense posture wasn't the point - virtue signaling was - putting in the work wasn't necessary.

Middle Eastern oil production holds the world's over-/under-supply switch of that crucial commodity. Its strategic import concerning this internationalized commodity and its internationally determined price is immense. Whether or not that requires troop deployments, at all or at the current level, is to be determined in light of properly spelled-out U.S. interests, and a thorough deliberation whether or not any of the region's problems are amenable to a military solution. I tend to favor withdrawing, in a deliberate, well-planned and well-coordinated fashion. I also tend to disfavor silly publicity stunts, such as the one engineered by Sen. Sanders entertaining his asshole side.

 

[esalla]

Today I watched Trump’s son-in-law, top advisor & international “peacemaker” Jared Kushner on CNN lying shamelessly about how the Trump Administration has been getting us out of “endless wars” in the Middle East — where he has in fact increased our military footprint in the last three years.

Kushner was interviewed by famous liberal reporter Fareed Zakaria, who said not a word exposing this lie. Nor were there any hard questions put by Zakaria to Kushner about Trump’s foreign policies in the Middle East or elsewhere. The Democrats are ceding this and many other important issues to the Trump campaign, and may very well lose the election as a result.

Here is a more honest interview in which the popular right wing Tucker Carlson gives a chance to leftwing journalist Anya Parampil to rip into the “criminal neocons” of both the Biden and Trump camps. What do you think about this short interview?

The Grayzone's Anya Parampil rips "criminal neocons" in Biden & Trump camps





View attachment 378724

I agree with most everything Tucker says most of the time however his current deep state purpose is to be a hate monger to the right wing that listens to him

 

[flacaltenn]

Today I watched Trump’s son-in-law, top advisor & international “peacemaker” Jared Kushner on CNN lying shamelessly about how the Trump Administration has been getting us out of “endless wars” in the Middle East — where he has in fact increased our military footprint in the last three years.

Kushner was interviewed by famous liberal reporter Fareed Zakaria, who said not a word exposing this lie. Nor were there any hard questions put by Zakaria to Kushner about Trump’s foreign policies in the Middle East or elsewhere. The Democrats are ceding this and many other important issues to the Trump campaign, and may very well lose the election as a result.

Here is a more honest interview in which the popular right wing Tucker Carlson gives a chance to leftwing journalist Anya Parampil to rip into the “criminal neocons” of both the Biden and Trump camps. What do you think about this short interview?

The Grayzone's Anya Parampil rips "criminal neocons" in Biden & Trump camps





View attachment 378724

Not a fan of failed Neocon Mid East intervention either. But they got unanimous bipartisian support WHENEVER they need it to get us into the SAME REPEATED mistake..

So I don't see the issue with the Trump Mid East policy at all.. We're not "Imperialists for Democracy" anymore. Not "Nation Builders".. What's your indictment of the Trump Admin Mid East policy when he WALKED BACK the Syrian intervention policy carefully, did the job to remove ISIS and essentially left.. (minus a couple hundred soldiers to guard the Syrian Oil fields)...

Sure is less "imperialistic" than Obama's "red line" that got crossed and Hillary's "no fly zone" enforcement trap idea there. On its face, intervening in a civil war with literally THIRTY SIDES TO IT -- is a horrible idea.. Yet we funded a 10 man freedom fighting unit there that took 3 years and about $10Mill for each "freedom fighter".. Guess when THAT happened...

GRANTED -- Team Trump is taking credit right now for "natural chains of events" in Mid East peace that have been brewing in the neighborhood for about a decade.. Israels' immediate neighbors Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon all doing or considering "mutual defense pacts" with Israel WITHOUT any US prodding.. So this UAE is just an extension of the realization that it's a Shia vs Sunni world in that "town"....

 

[flacaltenn]

Middle Eastern oil production holds the world's over-/under-supply switch of that crucial commodity. Its strategic import concerning this internationalized commodity and its internationally determined price is immense.

At a time when the govt got out the way of having us TRULY energy independent -- you're gonna have to retire this worn out "blood for oil" meme... At least until the Green Raw Deal becomes reality and the lights go out again...

US BECAME "energy independent" this past year.. Doesn't mean we dont still import oil from around the world.. Only that we dont' NEED to if times get tough..

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

So I don't see the issue with the Trump Mid East policy at all.. We're not "Imperialists for Democracy" anymore. Not "Nation Builders".. What's your indictment of the Trump Admin Mid East policy when he WALKED BACK the Syrian intervention policy carefully, did the job to remove ISIS and essentially left.. (minus a couple hundred soldiers to guard the Syrian Oil fields)...

You are right Trump policy is that we are no longer “Imperialists for Democracy” or “Nation Builders.” Actually, we haven’t been those for a long time.

We are mainly just plain “imperialists” defending a U.S.-dominated dollar “empire,” and we try to destroy nations under both Democratic and Republican Administrations if they strongly oppose U.S. corporate interests.

My OP did not single out Trump’s foreign “policy” — if you can call personal idiosyncratic actions a policy — I pointed out the Democrat’s unwillingness to fundamentally differ with Trump. Our soldiers are still occupying deserted parts of Syria, we’re sanctioning that devastated country, and holding oil wells by force in violation of International Law and human decency. Once the attempt to overthrow Assad became dominated by ISIS and ISIS-like forces the U.S. should have immediately abandoned its encouragement of Civil War, and it now should help the country rebuild by ending sanctions.

My general view is that the U.S. should pull back from its frontline “forward” policy trying to dominate Iraq and Syria, end oil sanctions against Iran as a “humanitarian gesture” and allow Chinese redevelopment of Iraqi oil and other infrastructure in Iraq and Iran. The world oil glut resulting will keep these countries relatively weak, and reassure China we are not out to strangle its crucial oil inputs. Renewed trade and development opportunities will open political cracks within the isolated and increasingly hated leadership of Iran — and quite likely encourage Revolution there. Syria under Assad is no threat to us and Iranian trade and Shia cultural influence in Iraq and Syria should be normalized. The natural Arab-Persian differences will reassert themselves if we interfere less.

Anyway my criticism of Trump that he is unstable and incompetent is subordinated to my overall criticism of U.S. foreign policy, which I think is basically unrealistic and self-defeating. If I really hated this country, or the world, I think I would embrace Trumpism as most likely to lead to disaster. This does not mean I believe Trump personally wants war.

P.S. I appreciate your thoughtful remarks in the “GRANTED” section of your comment. I think we can agree that there is a limit to what U.S. policy can constructively accomplish, and difficult but necessary adjustments will have to made in the very nature of things in that part of the world.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

In regard to the failed Trump policy in the U.N. Security Council and his failure to even get European support for a “SnapBack” of official JCPOA sanctions, I refer flacaltenn and others interested to the following article: Snapback: The last gasp of Trump's failed Iran strategy – Responsible Statecraft

Insofar as China is concerned, the Chinese have maintained an intelligent “hands off” policy in the Middle East and Persian Gulf for decades, though they have helped with anti-piracy efforts in the area. This despite their great dependence on Gulf Oil imports. The CCP ruling bureaucracy knows that it must meet the demands for economic development of its 1.4 billion citizens. It is aware that a future U.S. Administration may resort to insane measures like sanctioning its businesses, blocking oil shipments, even decoupling China from the international SWIFT dollar trading & payments system.

This is why it has now resorted to a more aggressive but still regional and limited exercise of power in the South China Sea. China is saying that it can and will itself guarantee free trade and safe transport of goods through those and nearby waters.

The corollary of course is that if the U.S. were to do something insane like try to cut off China from the world, or Middle East oil, China can and will retaliate in those waters by holding up or seizing oil to South Korea, Japan, etc. Of course there is also reportedly hydrocarbon resources in the South China Sea equal to those in the U.S. controlled Gulf of Mexico.

Recognizing the interests of the 1.4 billion hardworking Chinese, acknowledging their genuine national interests, power, and economic needs, allowing free trade and needed economic development aid to flow to Syria and Iraq, is not at all the same as “promoting Chinese hegemony over an even greater part of the world.“*

*This was in reply to a comment, apparently just now removed, asking if I was a paid Chinese agent in favor of establishing “Chinese hegemony.”

 

[Olde Europe]

Not a fan of failed Neocon Mid East intervention either. But they got unanimous bipartisian support WHENEVER they need it to get us into the SAME REPEATED mistake..

[... The Trump Mid East policy] Sure is less "imperialistic" than Obama's "red line" ...

A majority of Democrats voted against Bush's Iraq adventure.

What happened after President Obama requested Congressional authorization to punish Assad for gassing his population? Yeah, the entire Congress hid under their desks rather than answering the rallying cry in the affirmative.

Trump got within a whisker of war with Iran. I haven't seen a single Democrat coming out enthusiastic about that. Not sure about the prevalent Republican stance, but I guess they might get along with their Dear Leader reluctantly, at most.

So much for "unanimous bipartisian support".

 

[Leo123]

In regard to the failed Trump policy in the U.N. Security Council and his failure to even get European support for a “SnapBack” of official JCPOA sanctions, I refer flacaltenn and others interested to the following article: Snapback: The last gasp of Trump's failed Iran strategy – Responsible Statecraft

Insofar as China is concerned, the Chinese have maintained an intelligent “hands off” policy in the Middle East and Persian Gulf for decades, though they have helped with anti-piracy efforts in the area. This despite their great dependence on Gulf Oil imports. The CCP ruling bureaucracy knows that it must meet the demands for economic development of its 1.4 billion citizens. It is aware that a future U.S. Administration may resort to insane measures like sanctioning its businesses, blocking oil shipments, even decoupling China from the international SWIFT dollar trading & payments system.

This is why it has now resorted to a more aggressive but still regional and limited exercise of power in the South China Sea. China is saying that it can and will itself guarantee free trade and safe transport of goods through those and nearby waters.

The corollary of course is that if the U.S. were to do something insane like try to cut off China from the world, or Middle East oil, China can and will retaliate in those waters by holding up or seizing oil to South Korea, Japan, etc. Of course there is also reportedly hydrocarbon resources in the South China Sea equal to those in the U.S. controlled Gulf of Mexico.

Recognizing the interests of the 1.4 billion hardworking Chinese, acknowledging their genuine national interests, power, and economic needs, allowing free trade and needed economic development aid to flow to Syria and Iraq, is not at all the same as “promoting Chinese hegemony over an even greater part of the world.“*

*This was in reply to a comment, apparently just now removed, asking if I was a paid Chinese agent in favor of establishing “Chinese hegemony.”

Found this in your link to "Responsible Statecraft"

"Ben Armbruster is the Managing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He has more than a decade of experience working at the intersection of politics, foreign policy, and media. Ben previously held senior editorial and management positions at Media Matters, ThinkProgress, ReThink Media, and Win Without War."

Looks more like DNC propaganda to me.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

In regard to the failed Trump policy in the U.N. Security Council and his failure to even get European support for a “SnapBack” of official JCPOA sanctions, I refer flacaltenn and others interested to the following article: Snapback: The last gasp of Trump's failed Iran strategy – Responsible Statecraft

Insofar as China is concerned, the Chinese have maintained an intelligent “hands off” policy in the Middle East and Persian Gulf for decades, though they have helped with anti-piracy efforts in the area. This despite their great dependence on Gulf Oil imports. The CCP ruling bureaucracy knows that it must meet the demands for economic development of its 1.4 billion citizens. It is aware that a future U.S. Administration may resort to insane measures like sanctioning its businesses, blocking oil shipments, even decoupling China from the international SWIFT dollar trading & payments system.

This is why it has now resorted to a more aggressive but still regional and limited exercise of power in the South China Sea. China is saying that it can and will itself guarantee free trade and safe transport of goods through those and nearby waters.

The corollary of course is that if the U.S. were to do something insane like try to cut off China from the world, or Middle East oil, China can and will retaliate in those waters by holding up or seizing oil to South Korea, Japan, etc. Of course there is also reportedly hydrocarbon resources in the South China Sea equal to those in the U.S. controlled Gulf of Mexico.

Recognizing the interests of the 1.4 billion hardworking Chinese, acknowledging their genuine national interests, power, and economic needs, allowing free trade and needed economic development aid to flow to Syria and Iraq, is not at all the same as “promoting Chinese hegemony over an even greater part of the world.“*

*This was in reply to a comment, apparently just now removed, asking if I was a paid Chinese agent in favor of establishing “Chinese hegemony.”

Found this in your link to "Responsible Statecraft"

"Ben Armbruster is the Managing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He has more than a decade of experience working at the intersection of politics, foreign policy, and media. Ben previously held senior editorial and management positions at Media Matters, ThinkProgress, ReThink Media, and Win Without War."

Looks more like DNC propaganda and you post pages of TDS bullcrap based on that? Come on, you're not fooling anyone.

I'm more than a bit skeptical that any well meaning American would be suggesting that China should be allowed to control the Middle East, myself.

 

[whitehall]

It's no secret that Hillary was in charge when the Benghazi defenders ran out of ammunition and were murdered by terrorist thugs. Hillary blamed her negligence on some obscure you tube video and with the cooperation of the liberal media she got away with it. God only knows how her husband got away with the bombing of a defenseless European country when he was caught with his pants down but that's the power of the press. The use of the term "footprint" as in "military footprint" is interesting. You could say honestly that the U.S. Military "footprint" or global presence prevents terrorist conflict. Of course the hate filled leftie sources have the freaking world upside down and that's how the poor TDS afflicted bastards like it..

 

[flacaltenn]

In regard to the failed Trump policy in the U.N. Security Council and his failure to even get European support for a “SnapBack” of official JCPOA sanctions, I refer @flacaltenn and others interested to the following article: Snapback: The last gasp of Trump's failed Iran strategy – Responsible Statecraft

So your entire indictment of the "failed" mid East policy boils down to not coddling Iran... Got it.. Funny you started out with anti-neocon rage and ended hung-up on the butt hurt over paying off Iran not to TEST or DEVELOPMENT an A-bomb whilst Obama remained in office..

It's a more STRATEGIC view of conflict in the Middle East. Don't NEED an agreement with Iran to foolishly try to prevent the inevitable.. You need the ENTIRE region allied AGAINST their attempts at aggression.. Sounds far superior to me...

Insofar as China is concerned, the Chinese have maintained an intelligent “hands off” policy in the Middle East and Persian Gulf for decades, though they have helped with anti-piracy efforts in the area. This despite their great dependence on Gulf Oil imports. The CCP ruling bureaucracy knows that it must meet the demands for economic development of its 1.4 billion citizens. It is aware that a future U.S. Administration may resort to insane measures like sanctioning its businesses, blocking oil shipments, even decoupling China from the international SWIFT dollar trading & payments system.

No one mentioned China.. Not truly a neo con strategy on China because they RAN FOR HILLS when their Mid East push fell apart... So I'll pass..

Just realize I took your posts out of order... I'll get to the other..

 

[eagle1462010]

https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2020-01-09/after-recent-deployments-how-many-us-troops-are-in-the-middle-east

Troop numbers have been down for the most part during Trump.........He refused to follow Obama on removing Assad.......took the gloves off and removed ROE's to the point of dropping a MOAB on dug in forces in Afghanistan............

He took the gloves off and allowed and untied the military to do it's job.............we are lowering forces now and hopefully getting the hell out of there soon......

 

[flacaltenn]

A majority of Democrats voted against Bush's Iraq adventure.

And they had NO SOLUTION to the 8 years of DAILY BOMBINGS and the humanitarian disaster caused by LOCKING UP the Iraqis with their evil shotgun-toting dictator and KILLING an estimated 200,000 Iraqi citizens from effects of the embargo and their blasted up infrastructure.. Only Libertarians had the guts to declare that the solution was to LEAVE SADDAM in power and "walk away"... Those same Dems wanted to CONTINUE the cruel cynical bombing and embargo indefinitely..

Actually only about 5 folks in Congress that agreed with that ACTUAL solution..

 

[flacaltenn]

What happened after President Obama requested Congressional authorization to punish Assad for gassing his population? Yeah, the entire Congress hid under their desks rather than answering the rallying cry in the affirmative.

Rightfully so.. American public finally REALIZED that yet ANOTHER (maybe 7th) attempt at Neo Con follies was unacceptable.. Not wise to take a position FOR or AGAINST Assad in Civil War with literally 34 different factions fighting each other...

Trump got within a whisker of war with Iran. I haven't seen a single Democrat coming out enthusiastic about that. Not sure about the prevalent Republican stance, but I guess they might get along with their Dear Leader reluctantly, at most.

Think he walked that line pretty well.. Iran is no position to harm the CONUS in an all out war.. Think Trump was wise to back off on the drone shoot down.. The Iranian naval aggression in the Straits hasn't been an issue since.. That's the right direction..