Pelosi wrong again Iraq is covered by the AUMF Trump has authorization to call strikes in Iraq he...

[MindWars]

On Thursday the United States killed General Qassim Soleimani, a top commander of Iran’s al-Quds Force, in an airstrike at Baghdad’s International Airport. The strike also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces. Seven people were reportedly killed in the airstrike.
PELOSI WRONG AGAIN! Iraq Is Covered by the AUMF - Trump Has Authorization to Call Strikes in Iraq, He Does Not Owe Pelosi Jack Squat

This reject is making herself look real bad lately worse than normal....

 

[Zorro!]

On Thursday the United States killed General Qassim Soleimani, a top commander of Iran’s al-Quds Force, in an airstrike at Baghdad’s International Airport. The strike also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces. Seven people were reportedly killed in the airstrike.
PELOSI WRONG AGAIN! Iraq Is Covered by the AUMF - Trump Has Authorization to Call Strikes in Iraq, He Does Not Owe Pelosi Jack Squat

This reject is making herself look real bad lately worse than normal....

Pelosi's not the brightest.

Iran's Blunder Cost Them A Deadly Terrorist General

Iran’s leaders badly needed a moral victory to show that it was not cowed by massive Israeli airstrikes in Syria, nor, indeed, by a deteriorating economy at home. In November, the Iranian regime ruthlessly suppressed anti-regime protests, killing up to 1,000 demonstrators. After the US struck five bases of Iran-backed militias in Iraq on Dec. 30, Iran decided that its credibility required a demonstration of power, and ordered the attack on the US embassy.​

The embassy attack was intended by Iran as a public act of ritual humiliation, and the United States had no choice but to respond. Trump chose to respond by subjecting Iran to an even more poignant form of humiliation, by assassinating a national hero, Gen. Qassam Sulemaini. It is easy to criticize the US president, but harder to recommend an alternative course of action. US airpower has limited effectiveness in constraining the diffuse Iranian-backed militias.​

Iran could use a combination of intermediate-range missiles, cruise missiles and drones to attack the Doha base.​

Iran’s problem is that it has the most to lose here, and it’s weak. That suggests that they will do something symbolic but essentially back down, rather than escalate and invite still further escalation in return. But that assumes they will act rationally, which in fact they usually do, but usually isn’t always.

The September attack on Aramco facilities in Saudi Arabia exposed the weakness of US air defenses. The Patriot anti-missile system can’t shoot anything flying lower than 60 meters, and Iran has low-flying cruise missiles. A successful strike against Doha certainly figures in American calculations. In late September, US Central Command temporarily moved command and control of the Doha base to a remote facility in Tampa, Florida, because the base is a “sitting duck” for Iranian missiles.

And lurking behind all of this is a new reality that the Iranians may not have fully absorbed: Thanks to fracking, the United States doesn’t have to keep the straits of Hormuz open anymore.

If Iran were to attack Doha, America’s response likely would be devastating. Two dozen missiles or bombing sorties could wipe out Iran’s economy in a matter of hours. Fewer than a dozen power plants generate 60% of Iran’s electricity, and eight refineries produce 80% of its distillates. A single missile strike could disable each of these facilities, and bunker-buster bombs of the kind that Israel used last month in Lebanon would entirely destroy them. Without much effort, the US could destroy the Port of Kharg from which Iran exports 90% of its hydrocarbons.

It seems clear that Iran was taken aback by the ferocity of America’s response to the embassy attack. If it anticipated this sort of attack, Gen. Sulemaini never would have appeared in person at the Baghdad Airport.

Trump Catches On Quick:

Most of the great wars of the past would have been far less bloody had they begun sooner. Rather than the First World War: if Germany had launched a preemptive assault on France during the First Morocco Crisis of 1905 before Britain had signed the Entente Cordiale with France and while Russia was busy with an internal rebellion, the result would have been a repeat of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 rather than the ghastly war of attrition that all but ruined Western civilization. It was a tragedy that the vacillating Kaiser Wilhelm II rejected the counsel of his general staff and kept the peace. Swift victory by one side was preferable to what followed. It is hardly controversial to argue that Britain and France should have prepared for war with Germany and preempted Hitler’s ambitions no later than the 1936 re-occupation of the Rhineland.

Trump’s preemptive action was likely a masterful stroke.

 

[WillowTree]

Quiet please! The left is in mourning!

 

[theHawk]

On Thursday the United States killed General Qassim Soleimani, a top commander of Iran’s al-Quds Force, in an airstrike at Baghdad’s International Airport. The strike also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces. Seven people were reportedly killed in the airstrike.
PELOSI WRONG AGAIN! Iraq Is Covered by the AUMF - Trump Has Authorization to Call Strikes in Iraq, He Does Not Owe Pelosi Jack Squat

This reject is making herself look real bad lately worse than normal....

Yes, the Dems were whining that President Trump didn’t inform them of a high value target hit. Why the fuck would he trust those traitors with such intel? They no doubt would had tipped off the Iranians.

 

[toobfreak]

This reject is making herself look real bad lately worse than normal....

The democrats have been locked into an historic meteoric downfall of cataclysmic proportions for years, it would seem. I am in awe at the privilege to be witness to it. An endless and unattainable effort to somehow save face from 2016's ass-bashing where there is no face left to save.

At this point, saying Nancy is wrong again or making herself just look worse to all outside her bubble microcosm is like saying rain is still wet.

 

[wamose]

When you listen to these unstable alarmists, is there any wonder why Trump keeps stuff like this a secret? You can't trust anyone in the Democratic leadership to keep that secret. They'd run right to the fake news and leak the information and the MSM would be more than happy to wreck Trumps plan by making it public. Democrats are against our country. They suck

 

[MindWars]

don'tworry ebola will take care........

 

[Obiwan]

 

[Obiwan]

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

View attachment 298125 View attachment 298126

They killed James Bond?

 

[elongobardi]

Pelosi hasn’t told the truth in 20 years and that’s being generous.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Quiet please! The left is in mourning!

I've never seen so much hysteria over such a small/good thing! They didnt give it a second thought when it was one of their own, but NOW, it's the end of the world

 

[Zorro!]

Failing War Mongers and Weapons Dealers Behind Trump Impeachment Push

A remarkably non-propagandistic news-report, in the Fake News New York Times, by Eric Lipton, Maggie Haberman and Mark Mazzetti, included powerful evidence that the impeachment-effort against US President Donald Trump is motivated by US Senators and Representatives - as well as by career employees of the US Departments of Defense, State Department, and other agencies - to increase the sales-volumes of US-made weapons to foreign countries.

Corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, and Northrop-Grumman, have been a major — if not the very top — motivation driving US international relations, and regarding Ukraine, Trump has not been supporting, but instead been trying to block, those weapons-sales — and creating massive enemies in the US Government as a direct consequence.

The article, issued online on Sunday, December 29th, is titled “Behind the Ukraine Aid Freeze: 84 Days of Conflict and Confusion”, and it quotes many such individuals as saying that President Trump strongly opposed the sale of US weapons to Ukraine, and that,

In an Oval Office meeting on May 23, with Mr. Sondland, Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Blair in attendance, Mr. Trump batted away assurances that [Ukraine’s current President] Mr. Zelensky was committed to confronting corruption. “They are all corrupt, they are all terrible people,” Mr. Trump said, according to testimony in the impeachment inquiry.​

In other words, Trump, allegedly, said that he didn’t want “terrible people” to be buying, and to receive, US-made weapons (especially not as US aid — free of charge, a gift from America’s taxpayers).

The article simply assumes that Trump was wrong that “they are all terrible people.”

However, a very strong case can be made that he is correct about Ukraine. Clearly, the standard line in the US-and-allied media, that the February 2014 overthrow and replacement of Ukraine’s democratically elected Government was a ‘democratic revolution’, instead of a US coup, is based on blatant lies, and the US-imposed coup-regime there is still in force, and has been perpetrating an ethnic cleansing in order to be able to remain in power. In fact, the current Ukrainian President, Volodmyr Zelenskiy, is the self-described “business partner” of, and was brought to power by, the brutal Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky, who helped the ‘former’ “Social Nationalist’ (National Socialist or Nazi) Arsen Avakov, plan and execute on 2 May 2014 the burning-alive inside the Odessa Trade Unions Building, of dozens or perhaps over a hundred people who had been printing and distributing leaflets against the coup.

For the Fake News New York Times, in its ’news’-report to simply presume that Trump had no valid reason for asserting what he did against Ukraine’s present (the Obama-installed) Government of Ukraine, constitutes merely anti-Trump (and pro-Obama) propaganda, on their part. However, the actual news-value in that article is real. They quoted from “a piece in the conservative Washington Examiner saying that the Pentagon would pay for weapons and other military equipment for Ukraine, bringing American security aid to the country to $1.5 billion since 2014.” This was an anti-Democrat, pro-Republican, newspaper and article, saying:

Kurt Volker, the US special representative for Ukraine, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at a Tuesday hearing. “I think it’s also important that Ukraine reciprocate with foreign military purchases from us as well, and I know that they intend to do so.” The assistance comes at a pivotal moment for Ukraine’s newly minted president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a popular comedian who won a landslide victory in April. Zelensky has made ending the Russian-backed insurrection in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region his top political priority.​

The Fake News Times was the anti-Trump appointee Kurt Volker, who said “it’s also important that Ukraine reciprocate with foreign military purchases from us as well, and I know that they intend to do so.” In other words: Volker was saying that Ukraine’s Government would follow through with America’s war against Russia, next door to Ukraine, and that therefore, US taxpayers should pay for Ukraine’s purchases of US-made weapons, such as from Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. He was saying that milking US taxpayers to boost those US corporations’ profits is good, not bad. He was saying that Ukraine is on US taxpayers’ dole, as if the Obama-installed, rabidly anti-Russian, Ukrainian Government is a charity-case which is the US Government’s business (and not merely those private stockholders’ business), and that therefore, Trump should continue Obama’s policy toward Ukraine, of using Ukraine in order ultimately to place on Ukraine’s border with Russia, missiles against Moscow, right across that border. This is what the Fake News New York Times is presenting in a favorable light.

Then, the Fake News New York Times ‘news’-report said:

For a full month, the fact that Mr. Trump wanted to halt the aid remained confined primarily to a small group of officials.

That ended on July 18, when a group of top administration officials meeting on Ukraine policy — including some calling in from Kyiv — learned from a midlevel budget office official that the president had ordered the aid frozen.

“I and the others on the call sat in astonishment,” William B. Taylor Jr., the top United States diplomat in Ukraine, testified to House investigators. “In an instant, I realized that one of the key pillars of our strong support for Ukraine was threatened.”​

In other words: the Fake News Times’s further attack against Trump’s intention not to provide this US taxpayer boondoggle to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, United Technologies, and other US weapons-making corporations — a boondoggle so as to continue free supply to the Obama-installed Ukrainian regime of US-made weapons against Russia — is that career US national-security personnel support and want to continue Obama’s war against Russia.

Then, the Fake News Times reported further:

“This is in America’s interest,” Mr. Bolton argued, according to one official briefed on the gathering.

“This defense relationship, we have gotten some really good benefits from it,” Mr. Esper added, noting that most of the money was being spent on military equipment made in the United States.​

America’s war against Russia is designed to enrich investors in US ‘Defense’-contractors.

The Fake News Times article closes with this impeach-Trump line:

But then, just as suddenly as the hold was imposed, it was lifted. Mr. Trump, apparently unwilling to wage a public battle, told Mr. Portman he would let the money go.

White House aides rushed to notify their counterparts at the Pentagon and elsewhere. The freeze had been lifted. The money could be spent. Get it out the door, they were told.

The debate would now begin as to why the hold was lifted, with Democrats confident they knew the answer.

“I have no doubt about why the president allowed the assistance to go forward,” said Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “He got caught.”
​

In other words: Trump yielded to the threat of being impeached. Trump recognized that unless Russia is going to be a main target of US weaponry, Trump’s own Presidency will be in jeopardy.

US foreign policies are a vast sales-promotion scheme, for America’s billionaires, who crave to control Russia, above all. Trump at this point can't buck them, instead, he’s continuing Obama’s policy on Ukraine, for now.

 

[The Original Tree]

We should all give Nancy a Hand of Applause for her epic idiocy since she became speaker.