There was much reaction by the right to a comment I made a couple of days ago, in which I stated that the word was far too complex to allow Republicans to be in charge. Much less Trump. This was a response to multiple posts in which Trump supporters asserted that the situation in the M.E. was "simple" in an effort to justify the assassination of Soleimani in Baghdad. Evidently done in an effort to draw attention from Trump's impeachment, but which almost dragged us into a war, and probably ultimately had a role in the death of 179 people on board that Ukrainian passenger jetliner. I don't know where this article appeared originally. It's just a newspaper clip that goes around in social media. Just a cut-n-paste image with no references (reproduced below). But it explains succinctly the complexities. So it's easy to see why they escape the comprehension of an uneducated President like Trump. Given that it's a very short article, I have included it in full. ********************************************************************************* By Aubrey Bailey, Fleets, Hants We support the Iraqi government in the fight against the Islamic State. We don’t like IS but IS is supported by Saudi Arabia, whom we do like. We don’t like President Assad. We support the fight against him but not IS which is also fighting against him. We don’t like Iran but Iran supports the Iraqi government against IS. So, some of our friends support our enemies and some of our enemies are our friends and some of our enemies are fighting against our other enemies whom we want to lose but we don’t want our enemies who are fighting our enemies to win. If the people we want to defeat are defeated, they might be replaced by people we like even less. And all this was started by us invading a country to drive out terrorists who weren’t actually there until we went in to drive them out. Do you understand now?
Democrats in the last 30 years have done a better job. Not perfect, but better. They have made mistakes due to miscalculations. But not blunders because they didn't understand the situation. I can see an argument could maybe be made that Obama's goof-up in Libya might be the exception.
Depends on the metric you use. Yes, they have done better in some ways. And Repubs have done better in other ways. Same goes with Trump. He's done some good things, and bad things. Of course the TDSers will never give Trump any credit for anything he has done. Hell...they couldn't even give Trump ONE DAY when he ordered Bagdadhi or however the scum bags name is spelled killed.
And at the bottom of it all is oil. The one good thing the world can do is start working on alternatives to oil based economies.
I'm talking about handling the M.E. situation as a whole. Getting rid of Al-Bagdadi may be a good thing. But it's an isolated event. Not a policy. It's useless if there is no strategy attached to it. The fact that Trump (and this whole administration) is incapable of establishing a strategy demonstrates that they are unable to grasp the complexities of the region.
Admit it, it doesn't matter WHAT Trump does, you and the rest of the TDSers will never give the guy credit for anything. Even the bold part there is a give and take.
Please point out a time in history when there was peace in the ME. Could it be you hold Donald Trump to an impossible standard? The ME acts... we react. It's really not that complicated.
Once the world doesn’t need oil we won’t need the ME and those people will eat each other alive. EU will become infested once the money runs out in the ME. Glad we’re across the ocean. S
By what measure? Bailey's Clear as Mud is perfect and conveys the convoluted landscape. The strategy to navigate the terrain will seem just as convoluted for a time.
You confuse me with you. One example: August 25, 2017 http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/u-n-sanctions-on-north-korea.511469/ Which, BTW, Trump ended up throwing in the garbage a few months later. And, of course, it's not my fault that Trump has done so very little one can praise. But if projection is the only response you can muster... I'll pass. You insist on wasting my time by derailing my threads. Looks like that's your purpose on this forum.
The "standard" of understanding what is going on in the M.E.? I agree that that's an impossible standard for Trump to achieve. It's precisely my point.
Because you are confused does not mean there is a overall plan. So far, many are impressed with Trump's performance and look forward to four more years following the completion of his first term.
Newsflash... it's an impossible standard for you to achieve as well. Pretending to understand isn't the same as understanding. Look at Barack Obama for example.
Probably so, but I'm not President. If I were I would make sure to surround myself with people who do, and produce a coherent strategy. Trump hasn't. So... you had any response to the OP? Or you just thought that by trying to make this discussion about me you might be able to excuse your idol? Newsflash: it didn't work!
The clear as mud article lays out reality that trump inherited thanks to bush and Obama . And given the stupidity of the neocon policy that created it, the only solution is to get out of the ME.
The OP is nothing but B.S. Especially your portion... When one has to exaggerate to prove their point, one already lost the argument.
obama did not respect the sovereignty of enemy countries, at least President Trump like President Bush gives them warnings.
Leftists like to pretend something is too "complicated" for others to understand so they need to either explain it or just be in charge of it. The Iranian general was a scumbag. Good riddance.
