Looming Disaster - Trump Inching The USA Closer to Another War

I gave the link. Read it yourself.

It's not farfetched. The Saudis have been looking to de-escalate since their oil depot was hit by the Yemenis.

While it may be questionable as to whether it was at Trump's urging or not, it seems certain he would have known the purpose of Soleimani's trip, if not before, at least upon notifying the Saudis and Iraqis of the impending strike.

••••••••••••••••••

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.al...steps-indirect-talks-nyt-191005171357718.html

Saudi Arabia and Iran have taken steps towards indirect talks to defuse tensions in the Middle East, with Riyadh asking Iraq and Pakistan to speak with the Iranian leadership about de-escalation, according to the New York Times.

In a report on Saturday, the Times said Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) asked the leaders of Iraq and Pakistan to intervene in the wake of the attacks on two Saudi oil facilities on September 14.

 

What bothers me is that this attack is being justified because Iran has been designated a state sponsor of terror.

Right now there is a bill in the Senate that has passed the Foreign Relations committee that designates Russia as a state sponsor of terror.

https://www.gardner.senate.gov/news...-terrorism-passes-foreign-relations-committee

Could Russia now be preparing for the Soleimani treatment? It would be foolish not to.

This incident was NOT just some 'among out a terrorist operation. The repercussions will be immense.

 

Status: This quotation has not been found in any of Thomas Jefferson's writings. He did, however, employ the phrase "chains of the Constitution" at least once, in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798: "

Ayn Rand
“To violate man’s rights means to compel him to act against his own judgment, or to expropriate his values. Basically, there is only one way to do it: by the use of physical force. There are two potential violators of man’s rights: the criminals and the government. The great achievement of the United States was to draw a distinction between these two — by forbidding to the second the legalized version of the activities of the first.
The Declaration of Independence laid down the principle that “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” This provided the only valid justification of a government and defined its only proper purpose: to protect man’s rights by protecting him from physical violence.
Thus the government’s function was changed from the role of ruler to the role of servant. The government was set to protect man from criminals — and the Constitution was written to protect man from the government. The Bill of Rights was not directed against private citizens, but against the government — as an explicit declaration that individual rights supersede any public or social power.”

 

BOOM!

End thread!

100% undeniable!

 

For the Democrats who are clutching Pearl's...

 

The Trump administration seems very confused.

In the letter, released Monday, Marine Corps Brig. Gen. William H. Seely III said that U.S. forces “respect your sovereign decision to order our departure.” A U.S. military official confirmed the letter’s authenticity.

The U.S. military said in a letter to Iraqi officials that it will reposition troops within Iraq in preparation for a possible withdrawal.

Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the letter was “a draft, it was a mistake, it was unsigned, it should not have been released.”

Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper said shortly after that the United States has not made any decision to leave Iraq.

Speaking of Esper, his chief of staff, Eric Chewning, just quit.

 

Trump is a coward. He is afraid to answer for his decisions.

Ordinarily, when America is facing a crisis such as this, an impending asymmetric war with Iran while being thrown out by the Iraqi government, the President would come before the American people and explain what is happening and what he doing about it. He would hold a press conference in the White House press room.

But not this President.

Why? He is scared to death of the White House press corps. He is not about to stand in front of a room full of reporters and answer for his behavior.

Besides, he thinks of himself as the imperial President. He doesn't have to answer to anyone, not reporters, not the members of Congress, and not the American people. His followers like this. God knows why. They don't.

Instead, like the meek little man that he is, he appears on the Rush Limbaugh show tells his loyal fans that the Iranian general needed killing.

On the Limbaugh show no one will ask him any embarrassing questions.

 

Exactly, most Americans don't understand that the Declaration of Independence defined the only purpose for the existence of government, any government. Anything other than an entity whose primary function and mandate is to protect the individual rights of The People is NOT a government. It is a master/slave system and should be overthrown. The Constitution was written within the context of the Declaration of Independence. We now have a false government whose primary function and purpose is to empower and enrich a select few at the expense of the The People.

The warning:



The result:



And now yet another war criminal American President wants to escalate the genocide that's been going on under pretext of 9/11 since 9/11. That isn't a government by any stretch as envisioned by the founders. A poster insists this is "legal" because the "law" says so.

"Everything Hitler did was legal." - Martin Luther King Jr.

 

Sure, I guess VietNam and Iraq wars ended so good.

 

Last I heard, VP Pence will have to face the nation to explain the strategy on Iran, while baby Trump will be golfing or throwing useless tantrums on Twitter.

 

If you're not a war-hawk, then you should be against what Trump did. Just look how all the most notorious war-hawks are reacting to Trump's strike: They absolutely love it. John Bolton was gleeful.

Virtually every major terrorist attack inside western countries, including 9/11, was committed by Sunni extremists. Virtually all the worst terrorist organizations in existence, including Al Qaeda and ISIS, are Sunni extremists. I'm not aware of a single terrorist attack inside a western country that was committed by a Shiite, although I'm sure there might be a few. Still, the overwhelming majority of terrorist attacks against western countries are committed by Sunni extremists, not Shiites.

How do you know that? Because the government told you? The same government whose been lying to you for years about everything under the sun?

I was in Iraq for seven months myself. You know who was trying to kill me? Saudis. In fact, most of the terrorist cells inside Iraq at the time were Saudi. Why aren't you and the rest of the Trump supporters shouting from the rooftops about that? Could it be because Trump has gotten cozy with the same Saudi vermin he once accused of planning 9/11?

Democrats are hypocrites. What else is new. Doesn't make Trump's decision a good one.

 

Yes, that's exactly right.

This was confirmed by the Iraqi prime minister.

Soleimani was in Iraq to meet with the Iraqi PM as part of a diplomatic process between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This means Pompeo was clearly lying when he accused Soleimani of posing an imminent threat to American lives.

It's even possible that the Trump administration themselves lured Soleimani into Iraq for the purpose of assassinating him.

 

Because I have never been in Iraq, and because you will reject any references to news stories about Iranian covert operations against Americans there beginning in 2003 as lies and propaganda, I can only tell you that my other impressions about what Iran has done there came from young guys who served there and are now out of the military. One of them has two Purple Hearts, and he's very lucky to be alive.

I know, I know. 'Anecdotal' stories are a dime-a-dozen, and not to be believed necessarily. But you don't have to dig very deeply into all the numerous stories about Iranian Secret Service sabotage and ambushes staged against Americans in Iraq to conclude there must be truth in it.

As far as SAUDIS killing Americans in Iraq...? Truthfully, you are the first (and the only) person I have ever heard to claim that. Can you elaborate?

 

I like how you seem to think you know what you're talking about but don't. It's good effort.

The reason I specifically asked about those conflicts was because they were early in the countries founding.

There is no prohibition in the US Constitution for the CIC to engage in hostilities with foreign countries WITHOUT a declaration of war. Indeed, our new country engaged in hostilities with foreign powers without declarations of war.

You're welcome to point to the text of the Constitution that says the CIC can't engage in hostilities without a declaration of war.

Since there is no prohibition on hostilities short of a declaration of war, it is well within the legislatures Constitutional authority to outline what CAN occur short of a declaration of war....hence the War Powers Act.

What is a "declaration of war"? It is the ability of the Legislature to define and act on foreign conflicts.....which is exactly what the War Powers Act is: it defines when and how the CIC may engage in open hostilities.

Legislation is exactly how Congress makes it's declarations and exercises it's authority.....therefore it's eminently Constitutional for Congress to declare what a state of conflict is and how it may be pursued.

Congress is literally defining what it means to engage in hostilities with a foreign country in the War Powers Resolution/Act.

For example, the United States first real "war" - against Tripoli in 1802 - were statutorily authorized but not accompanied by a formal declaration of war.

Congress also expressly authorized the use of force in the Quasi War with France in 1798, against Iraq in 1991 and 2002, and against the perpetrators of the September 11, 2001, attacks, all without issuing a formal declaration of war.

So no, you have no idea what you're talking about....but you're welcome to keep puffing out your chest in ignorance.

 

There is no doubt that the killing of Iran's General has made "war" likely. What form will this take?

It's been suggested Iran will engage in a Cyber Attacks and/or use already established terrorist organizations to attack American Citizens abroad as well as our diplomats in embassy's and missions around the world. In fact even the threat made by Iran's Supreme Leader has and will impact the travel industries, within and without our borders.

Trump has threatened cultural and sacred Islamic places, offending a billion Muslims. The possibility of more carnage by suicide vests, and even the use of poison gas and other deplorable means to kill are not out of the question.

That said, I am reminded of this midterm History Class essay question: "Does man make history, or does history make the man?"

 

Pence is an idiot. He will simply repeat what Trump has said, and he will ignore the strong possibility of a disastrous asymmetric war with Iran that will make Iraq look like a cakewalk.

I noticed that Trump's fans have ignored my posts. They usually do. They are not fans of reality. They feel it is best to ignore the truth.

 

I’m not going to quote all that because it would be a waste of space.

No I don’t “think” I know what I’m talking about, I know what I’m talking about since I actually spent years studying the Constitution, civil rights laws/doctrines and related subjects and applied what I learned in a federal and county court of law. And it’s obvious you didn’t or don't understand any of the basics. It doesn't make me an expert on the subject but it does serve to educate me thoroughly on the subject, You’re operating under several fallacious ASSumptions all presumably derived from government/MSM propaganda/indoctrination.

1. That if the US government did it in the past then it must be constitutional and therefore legal.

2. That if the Constitution does not specifically prohibit an act in detail, it must be constitutional and therefore legal.

3. That the 9th and 10th Amendments are irrelevant because they don’t specifically list the billions of possible government acts prohibited by these.

4. That as long as CONgress authorizes it then it must be constitutional and therefore legal unless and until declared otherwise by the unelected black robed lawyers and their creative/phony “interpretations” of the Constitution.

But I don’t blame you for your misconceptions because that’s what you’ve been fed by “authority”. You can take comfort in knowing tens (hundreds?) of millions Americans believe in the same misconceptions.

“They must find it difficult, those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as authority.” - Gerald Massey

As already explained in posts #304 and #309, the US government was created for the primary function that a government exists for, to protect the individual rights of The People. This is well stated in our founding document and the Constitution was created to uphold and especially restrict government to those principles. Once government's agenda turns to genocide and justification for committing genocide and other crimes against humanity, it is no longer a government since it no longer exists to protect the individual rights of The People. The history of the US government's atrocities and the phony unconstitutional "laws" it enacts to try to justify/enable its bloody agenda does not change those facts no matter how much you want it to.

/end lesson #3

I don't believe any amount of lessons will change your indoctrination but I will correct your fallacies if you insist on posting them.

 

You should get a refund then, because you clearly didn't learn anything.

It's not just that "this is what happened in the past", it's what's happened for the entire history of the country, including right after they wrote the Constitution.

And yes, the creation of laws by Congress that declare, in writing, what Constitutes engaging in hostilities is eminently Constitutional: Not only is the authority for Congress to pass laws Constitutional, but Congress was given the enumerated power of DECLARING war.

Now if you want to sit there and think "declaring war" only means standing up and saying "we declare war", you clearly haven't put much thought into the process.

What it means, in reality, is that Congress DEFINES what conflict is with foreign countries....and that is done via the laws they pass.

 

Trump ordered an airstrike that killed Qassem Soleimani, Iran's most powerful military official, because of "imminent threats to American lives."

We know Trump was lying. How do we know? No one can cite an attack by Iran on Americans. It has never happened. Why? Because the Iranians are neither stupid nor suicidal.

We are all anxious to hear about this "imminent and sinister" plot against Americans, but don't hold your breath.

Then there is this from Brett McGurk, a veteran diplomat and national-security official. "Even if these imminent attacks were planned, it's just odd, because if that was the case, that means there were cells in Iraq that were ready to attack us, throughout the country, apparently. Soleimani wasn't going to carry out those attacks himself. I assume those cells are still in place. So it's a very volatile situation, the Iranians will react, and then the onus will be back on the United States for what we do."

He added: "The capabilities are there, they've been there for a long time. So removing Soleimani does not necessarily remove that threat at all."

 

Whoops! Never say never. Trump's order to take out the Iranian general change the calculus. Things just became a lot more serious.

CNN reports, "Iran launched more than a dozen missiles at two Iraqi bases that hold US troops in what appears to be retaliation for the American airstrike that killed a top Iranian general last week, the Pentagon said Tuesday.

"A US official told CNN that there were no initial reports of any US casualties, but an assessment of the impact of the strikes is underway. There are casualties among the Iraqis at Ain al-Asad airbase following the attack, an Iraqi security source tells CNN. The number of casualties and whether the individuals were killed or wounded was not immediately clear.

"White House aides are making plans for a possible address to the nation by President Donald Trump, according to two officials."

"Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and overwhelming force. In some areas overwhelming means obliteration," President Donald J. Trump.

Now what?

This is how wars are started. The Iraq war was child's play compared to a war with Iran. Iraq's military was decimated by American forces in the Gulf War and was weaken again by the weapons inspection regimen throughout the '90's. Iran's military forces have no such handicap, plus she has proxy forces throughout the region that can do considerable harm to American forces and our allies.

 

I didn't pay for any of it (other than court costs and Pacer fees) but I never lost a case as a suis juris plaintiff or defendant so you are incorrect, I must have learned quite a bit in order to succeed vs high priced attorneys. As for you, you not only show you don't know very much beyond a few tidbits but you have zero live experience, just a lot of wishful hot air.

I never disagreed that the US government has committed all sorts of human rights atrocities past and present, probably beginning with the day after the Constitution was ratified. As already explained so even a grade school child could understand, none of it was/is within the constraints of the Constitution and therefore none of it is legal.

Only if it is truly constitutionally compliant. Congress was never granted constitutional authority to delegate any of its constitutionally granted powers via "law" or any other instrument to another branch of government. Doing so is a clear violation of the 10th Amendment.

That's correct, you must have read Article I and even perhaps understood parts of it. However that has nothing to do with what I posted. The power to legislate does not include the power to create unconstitutional law. The power to legislate is LIMITED by all the constraints of the other sections of the Constitution. Therefore the War Powers Act is wholly unconstitutional.

That's incorrect, the Constitution defines what conflict is with foreign countries and that is a function of international treaties which the US government is a signatory to and is incorporated into the US Constitution via the Supremacy Clause. Going by your claim, Congress can decide that massacring the entire population of Canada is legal merely by passing a law that says it's legal.

 

You must be a Trump fan. You are doing your level best to derail this thread at a very critical time.

As a Trump fan, you seem unconcerned that we are headed towards a devastating war with Iran and our President has nothing to say.

Trump will not address the nation tonight

President Trump will not address the nation Tuesday on the missile strikes targeting the Iraqi military bases, two senior administration officials told CBS News.

But do you care? Hell, no.

 

If you actually read my posts you would know that my opinion about Trump is that he's a war criminal and racketeer, among many other negative characteristics. A despicable excuse for a human being who should be behind bars, not making critical decisions that affect the entire planet.

1. Nothing I do in this forum affects anything other than a discussion.
2. Everything I've posted in this thread is directly related to Trump's war crimes, not to mention the war crimes committed by the US government in general since the founding of our Republic. It's an ever repeating pattern that does not seem to have an end in sight.

3. As an offspring of Holocaust survivors and an activist against all wars, I'm well aware of what's going on. If you actually believe Trump has anything viable to say or will say anything viable you would be delusional.

Correct, I do not care about what Trump has to say because I know that anything he says will only escalate the situation, not improve it. What he has to say and will always have to say is strictly about Trump himself. It's not up to Trump at this point, it's up to the rest of the world to try to stop this out of control maniac from inflicting further damage, preferably starting with our impotent excuse for CONgress.

You are taking out your frustrations on the wrong person and obviously don't know what you're talking about.