Sunday, March 11, 2018

Trump's North Korean big gamble ?

Donald Trump has an extraordinary
opportunity to change
decades long policy on
North Korea , BUT will it
Things can only get stranger for the Trump Administration . While sitting on edge of the possibility of a new war with North Korea , the exchange of threats , tweets and  ‘They will be met with fire and fury’ and the laughing out loud Rocket man" at the UN speech . (1)>>North Korea turned around and pulled a fast one on the Trump administration , what happened even has the Secretary of the State in confusion . AS it appears , North Korean leader is vary smart , we underestimated him . North Korean leader Kim Jong Un extended an invitation to meet with Trump, which the President quickly accepted. I think it's no coincidence ,something is going on. Trump’s left-field play isn’t surprising when you consider he sees himself as a rule-breaking, deal-making, history-shaker who alone can achieve what the establishment figures who underestimate him cannot: a Nixon-goes-to-China breakthrough. It’s also TV ratings gold: a headline-grabbing distraction from the Mueller investigation that keeps Stormy Daniels in a teacup. North Korea has reportedly agreed to halt nuclear and missile testing and has not demanded that the US and South Korea stop their joint military exercises.  Summoned to the Oval Office on the spur of the moment, the South Korean envoy found himself face to face with President Trump one afternoon last week at what he thought might be a hinge moment in history. Chung Eui-yong had come to the White House bearing an invitation. But he opened with flattery, which diplomats have discovered is a key to approaching the volatile American leader. “We could come this far thanks to a great degree to President Trump,” Mr. Chung said. “We highly appreciate this fact.” Extraordinary because few thought this
realistically could happen. Trump has said in the past that he would be open to meeting with Kim, but on Tuesday, when asked about the possibility, he was noncommittal. "We're going to see what happens," he said.The surprise nature of the announcement gave the impression of an ad hoc gambit rather than a careful, well-thought-out approach to dealing with an unpredictable nuclear regime.Trump’s decision to meet with Kim stunned everyone involved, according to a report from Peter Baker and Choe Sang-Hun at the New York Times. He accepted Kim’s invitation from a South Korean envoy on the spot, brushing aside warnings from Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and National Security Adviser HR McMaster that he proceed with caution. He kept Secretary of State Rex Tillerson out of the loop. Trump's aides have been wary of North Korea's diplomatic overtures because of its history of reneging on international commitments and the failure of efforts on disarmament by the administrations of President Bill Clinton, President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama. Previous attempts by the North to get such a meeting have been dismissed out of hand. Now, with the North in possession of a nuclear arsenal, agreeing to such a summit represents a moment of great peril for Trump and his team.For the North, it’s both a reward and a chance to secure international legitimacy – something the US has previously fiercely blocked. “Right now, [Kim Jong-un] is setting the agenda and the pace, and the Trump admin is reacting. The admin needs to move quickly to change this dynamic,” Suzanne DiMaggio, a senior fellow at the New America think tank, wrote on Twitter. “This appeals to Donald Trump’s ego,” adds Coleman. “He wants to be seen as the person behind this, which of course he’s not.”

(1)>>North Korea turned around and pulled a fast one on the Trump..Recognizing that Kim is dictating terms to Trump is not defending Kim, genius. It is an observation that anybody with at least half a brain can see. When Trump vacates the Oval Office, we do not get to pretend he was never there...just like we could not do when GWB left office.  President Trump has yet again done something no other president has done and scheduled a diplomatic meeting to broker some kind of peace deal. This president is going to go down in history with amazing accomplishments. And yes, some failures.

Friday, March 9, 2018

A Little "History" of Tariffs .

The Republican Party was born
for tariffs , as this old
illustration shows.
If  a Trade war is looming. President Donald Trump can learn a little from Henry Clay , I will explain that as we read on . BUT NOW ,  US President Donald Trump on Thursday approved the levies of 25 per cent on imported steel and 10 per cent on imported aluminium despite warnings of a global trade war and protests from allies in Europe and home.As he signed off on contentious (1.1)>>trade tariffs, Trump declared the American steel and aluminium industries had been “ravaged by aggressive foreign trade practices”. Trump was apparently referring to excessive imports and global production overcapacity driven partly by Chinese government subsidies.  American history over 200 years has been a subject of tariffs since its first day . (1.2)>>The 1st United States Congress, wanting a straightforward tax that was not too onerous and easy to collect, passed the Tariff Act of 1789The goal of using higher tariffs to promote industrialization was urged by the first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, and after him the Whig Party. They generally failed because Jeffersonian and Jacksonian Democrats said the tariff should be only high enough to pay the government's bills; otherwise, it would hurt the consumers. The Republicans, however, made high tariffs the centerpiece of their economic policy beginning in 1861, and as late as 1930. Since 1930, tariffs have not been a major political issue.  Trump's plan can go both ways . There was a lot of discussions about the pros and cons of this deal . Trump has stood by the tariffs, despite resistance from his fellow Republicans and other countries, which have vowed to respond with levies of their own. On Thursday, Trump pressed ahead with the imposition of 25 percent tariffs on steel imports and 10 percent for aluminum.   The ultimate irony: by acting ostensibly to protect U.S. steel jobs with sweeping tariffs, The tariffs are good for steel producers that melt and produce their own steel. But for those which is reliant on imported raw materials, they could prove catastrophic.  Trump will also kill off some steel jobs.Trump, however, is ignoring the W.T.O., which he dismisses as biased against the United States. That’s one reason it is important not to discount history, or the possibility of further repercussions. The rest of the world could interpret Trump’s tariffs as a signal that the United States is retreating from leadership on trade, and, indeed, retreating from a basic commitment to play by the rules that previous U.S. Administrations did so much to create. In the long term, as The Economist points out in its latest issue, such a perception could prompt other countries to react in kind, thereby undermining the entire system, much as the (2)>>Smoot-Hawley Act did in the thirties. Last April, Trump ordered the Department of Commerce to investigate steel imports under a little-known part of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232, which allows the executive branch to place import restrictions or tariffs on steel for national security reasons.  More broadly, Trump’s move risks undermining international order built on mutual trust in the World Trade Organization, the multilateral system of dispute settlement designed to keep trade fair. In invoking “national security” as the basis for tariffs, (3)>>Trump is essentially acting outside the WTO. Trump’s “smart” trade action, then, might spark a trade war, hurt the auto industry, bleed jobs from the Rust Belt, and anger American allies around the world.    President Donald Trump can learn a little from Henry Clay , strangely enough last year President Donald Trump sang the praises of “the great 19th century statesman” Henry Clay, the former Speaker of the House, U.S. Senator and Whig Party co-founder. “Henry Clay believed in what he called the ‘American system,’ and proposed tariffs to protect American industry and finance American infrastructure,” Trump said. “Like Henry Clay, we want to put our own people to work… Clay was a fierce advocate for American manufacturing. He wanted it badly, he said, very strongly, free trade… He knew all the way back, early 1800s, Clay said that trade must be fair, equal, and reciprocal. Boom.” Experts say that Trump’s assessment of Clay’s belief that the country would prosper when industry at home grew is correct, yet Clay’s ideas weren’t based on helping American workers. The way to keep the material within the U.S. and benefit textile producers here, Clay reasoned, would be to tax British imports, to encourage people to want to buy fabric produced domestically rather than from overseas. But, though Clay’s ideas were intended to support the U.S. as a great commercial nation.   In that sense, he diverged from the populist idol who has been a frequent touchstone for Trump: Andrew Jackson, whose portrait hangs in the Oval OfficeAnd so for the Trump  administration, a key test will be its willingness to go toe to toe with Wall Street .  Senator McConnell left no doubt — and issued a veiled warning  to the White House, that he sides with those in his party who fear Trump’s action could spark a global skirmish.“There is a lot of concern among Republican senators that this could metastasize into a larger trade war. We are urging caution,” the senator said Tuesday, his first public remarks since Trump announced his trade plans last week.

(1.1)>>trade tariffs. A tariff – A tariff is a tax on imported goods. It made European goods more expensive and encouraged Americans to buy cheaper products made in America. The tariff also made the country money, which would be used to improve things. (1.2)>>The 1st United States CongressThe U.S. Constitution of 1789 gave the federal government authority to tax, stating that Congress has the power to "... lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." and also "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."Tariffs between states is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, and all domestically made products can be imported or shipped to another state tax-free. (2)>>Smoot-Hawley Act. Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930, which sharply raised tariffs on more than twenty thousand goods produced overseas and exported to the United States, didn’t cause the Great Depression, but it did accentuate it. As other countries retaliated with import duties of their own, the volume of world trade spiralled down. At the start of 1930, world trade had been about $2.7 billion. By the beginning of 1932, it was less than $1.3 billion. Among the countries that imposed new duties on American exports were Australia, Canada, Cuba, France, Mexico, Spain, and New Zealand.(3)>>Trump is essentially acting outside the WTO.  World Trade Organization  U.S. President Donald Trump did not single-handedly kill the WTO yesterday by announcing he would impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. It had been dying a slow death for a long time. China in particular never accepted the norms of the WTO, and its spectacular economic success pursuing policies that too often defied the organization’s market-based principles did more than any other country to weaken the legitimacy of the system. The WTO is already on the verge of paralysis because the United States has vetoed new judicial appointments, letting the number of trade judges dwindle to four from the usual seven. A trade war triggered by safeguard tariffs would open a new wound in the global trading system, because it would unravel almost a quarter of a century of discipline and dethrone the WTO as the arbiter of global trade and a check on protectionism.

Sunday, March 4, 2018

A Cautionary Satire . [ maybe ] the Russians Helped Obama win .

 A Cautionary Satire . [ maybe ] the Russians  also Helped Obama win . 
I have a good "theory" here . But Sadly I don't have any "evidence" to prove what I have to say . We all have heard that President Obama knew about the (1)>>"alleged" Russian meddling as far back as 2016 , the report I read among the online archives  stated that Obama antagonized on what to do about it .  The accusation is that Obama knew that the Russian interference was at full blast , the White House was divided and struggled to come up with a plan to deal with it . To me it sounded like some body got caught , it leaked , it was now damage control . I don't know but I suspect that Like Trump , (2)>>Obama may have been in close relations with the Russians . Many observers believe that Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election to Barrack Obama when he was caught on tape providing this classic example of stereotyping. "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. These are people who pay no income tax." The repeated broadcasting of this quote, and its reinforcing an already established image of Romney being mean (remember the dog on the roof story), cast him as out-of-touch with large groups of Americans, especially Republicans and Independents who may have benefited from government assistance at pivotal points in their lives.  In a similar manner, President Obama found his private moment of political candor caught by a live microphone on  as he told President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia that he would have “more flexibilit” to negotiate on the delicate issue of missile defense after the November election, which Mr. Obama apparently feels confident he will win.   HERE is Something now we are accusing Trump  about the same thing .  Mr . Obama's confidence maybe founded that he was going to "get"  help to win by beating Romney who is staunch anti- Russian. Four years later, in 2012, (3)>>The Barack Obama re-election campaign showcased the accomplishments of the reset policy. For its part, Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s campaign faulted the administration for treating the Kremlin with kid gloves when Russia was, according to Romney, the United States’ ‘number one geopolitical foe’ because it ‘fights every cause for the world’s worst actors’. So who was in cahoots with whom between 2008 and 2012? Donald J Trump knew that the election was being rigged for Hillary , he spouted on numerous rallies { foreknowledge }of it while leaking out the fact that it maybe rigged for him as well .  I know it don't make any sense . Trump , perhaps the people involved in the GOP nomination also knew . The Fact that Trump winning the nomination of his party eliminates the theory of Russian meddling completely  . (4)>>Just how the Russians got to the GOP to pick Trump  over Gov. Rick Perry , Rubio , Cruz Christie . They were a lot more qualified to the oval office , than Trump . Otherwise Hillary knew that her  DNC was lined up for her , as she swept Barnie Sanders under the rug for her nomination .   So both Political Parties,Democrats and Republicans played some kind of  game on the American audience.Yes, there was [ could have been ] dirty politics at play
Why Obama was Russia's easy pawn .
Since the Soviet collapse, Russia has been an issue in every US presidential election campaign. Enter Sen . John McCain and Sarah Palin .{ see below }  In 2008, Democrats accused the George W. Bush administration of endangering US security by needlessly antagonising Vladimir Putin’s Russia and raising the level of tension between the two countries, especially during and after the Russo-Georgia war.   What is interesting that back in 2008 , Russia had put its hopes in Barack Obama an "obscure" Senator from Illinois who did not follow the cold war party line , whom the right wing media along with Candidate Hillary Clinton accused Obama of  " Marxism" . Hope you read this far , I know your all gasping and in shock right now . Did you pick up my line?: Russia had put its hopes in Barack Obama an "obscure" Senator from Illinois.  The right wing media along with Candidate Hillary Clinton accused Obama of  "Marxism". (5)>>Obama's alleged Marxist connections , his early pro- Russian views could have paved the way for him, giving the Russians the idea of of a President of the United States that did not follow the old party line .  He would be easy to work with it , the easing of tensions in 2008 were not so complicated as they are now.  After Barack Obama became President , he wanted to present to the world a kind of New America that would reach out even to its enemies . This would be called the "apologies tour " where he visited numerous nations , particularly Muslim nations . This caused an up roar with many Republicans who were on board with Bush's war on terror propaganda .  In 2009 Barack Obama did the untenable he  visited Russia , which he gave a vary stunning speech praising Russia . So many people here in America all but  forgot about it . Right now all we hear is Trump -Russia nonsense , but the Obama speech in Moscow revealed details .  Barack Obama , here is his key speech , read closely to what he said . He urged Russia to move on from the cold war and stop interfering in the affairs of neighboring states.   

"In 2009, the great power does not show strength by dominating or demonising other countries. The days when empires could treat other sovereign states as pieces on a chess board are over," he said. But, speaking at Moscow's New Economic School on the second day of his visit, he acknowledged that the US needed to play its role in making a "fresh start" in US-Russian relations. He admitted this would not be easy, and acknowledged previous tensions. "America wants a strong, peaceful and prosperous Russia ... on the fundamental issues that will shape this century, Americans and Russians share common interests that form a basis for co-operation," he told his audience.The president said old assumptions that the US and Russia were antagonists vying for spheres of influence were wrong."Given our interdependence, any world order that tries to elevate one value or people over another will inevitably fail. "That is why I have called for a 'reset' in relations between the United States and Russia. This must be more than a fresh start between the Kremlin and the White House, though that is important. "It must be a sustained effort among the American and Russian people to identify mutual interests, and to expand dialogue and co-operation that can pave the way to progress."
The Dire Aftermath , 2012 . 
The 2009 speech set a tone what Russia expected out of America  . The idea of a mutual cooperation with global and economic interests . The idea of a partnership . That all faded out after Obama won in 2012 , a different Obama emerged . The Tea Party movement swept the Democrats out of power in Congress . Mitt Romney spun the during the debates a furor of Anti-Russian sentiment . The Russians - Kremlin were watching the debate with worrisome feelings . If Romney won out , it would create friction , as they saw it . Romney had to lose . He did . Under mysterious circumstances you can only guess . Romney would have beat Obama in 2012 . My feelings back then was that Mr. Obama as good a man , but as he was never going to do anything as he did in his first term now  as a lame duck in office . The Republicans took over after the political mob in 2010 voted to the far right .  Time Magazine even posted on the front cover "Obama hit the road" , the nation had shifted . There was no more HOPE or Change .  The "reset" that the Russians hoped for was no longer in Obama's hands he lost control , soon his foreign policy turned into a disaster with the Arab Spring , Syria , Iraq , Benghazi  The next blunder was Ukraine . I am sure the hotline to Moscow was buzzing at 3 a.m. The war mongers in Congress  wanted  Obama  under mounting pressure to take tougher steps against Moscow amid criticism that the U.S. response to Russia’s intervention in Ukraine has been too weak.  The Republican - Democratic neocons Called for more muscular actions, from expelling Russia from the Group of Eight to offering military support to Ukraine, came as Russia’s stock market rallied and the ruble gained value a day after Obama authorized an initial round of sanctions meant to punish the Russian economy. Obama spent a great deal arguing with  VP Joe Biden .  Obama said that  "course of action would be called meddling in another nations affairs , we have to use a DIPLOMATIC PATH FIRST " .  Obama who once offered a new way succumbed  to the old guard just like Trump is right now . VP. Joe Biden cussed out to Obama .  " Congress is going garb you by the balls if you don't look tough ....." Barack Obama had been stuck to the wall on Ukraine . Like Syria , the United States was sending military advisors to the Ukraine further infuriating Putin who feared a invasion of NATO forces . Putin could not believe what was going on in Washington D.C. . His first though was  (6)>>" Who are the crazies?". Fearing a NATO attack Putin sent Russian troops into Ukraine after the Pro-  Russian Ukrainian President was ousted in  a political coup backed by the United States placing a Pro NATO puppet in charge of a provisional government with strong ties to the EU and Germany. The whole thing unraveled 40 years of SALT Treaties between the United States and Russia . It seemed that Barack Obama took a tough stance , either by pressure of the inner elite in Congress , or he  was just too weak .  2014 saw the big fallout of anti- Russia propaganda to American audiences .  Any case Obama sent  then Secretary of the State John Kerry to bark at Putin right along the boarder of Russia inside of the Ukraine !  (7)>>Kerry spouted " Putin you loose !" on national TV  . It seemed like we were at the brink of war ! There’s noth­ing in Kerry’s re­sponse about po­ten­tial mil­it­ary ac­tion that firmly says that the U.S. will or will not con­sider mil­it­ary in­ter­ven­tion. " Of course mil­it­ary ac­tion is nev­er prefer­able. But right now, the U.S. seems to be keep­ing as many op­tions open as pos­sible" . Said  John Kerry .  I mean , Come on serious !  Just why did the Obama administration poke it's nose in another nations business ? Even at such a high cost of going to war [ threats of war ] . I can see why Putin reacted as he did and he still does to this day because of American NATO interference along Russia's territorial claims  . Here the Obama legacy left the next Presidential administration with serious foreign policy blunders .
" Can we just get along " 
On a TV interview during the Presidential campaign Donald Trump was talking about (8)>>"Getting along with Russia "  . I don't know if that is evidence of collusion at best , or  Trump's rather treasonable plea to Russia to hack Hillary's e-mails as "evidence" of knowing that Russia is on his side . You have to remember in my satirical retelling of how Barack Obama may have won  the election in 2008  & 2012 because he wanted , just like Donald Trump a reset to the ever eroding  relations with Russia . The Russians may have helped Obama as well.  Following Obama's legacy , Trump  said  stronger U.S. relations with Russia would benefit the globe and suggests that Russian sanctions may be lifted. Trump says in Vietnam that Russia has been "very heavily sanctioned" and "it's now time to get back to healing a world that is shattered and broken." The president is pointing to the need to work with Russia to solve problems in Syria, North Korea and Ukraine. Trump says he believes "having Russia in a friendly posture as opposed to always fighting them is an asset."  Despite Donald Trump’s hoped-for reconciliation, how the several rounds of talks he’s held with a top Putin adviser last  have not yet made any progress, and what it’s like to be a special envoy for a secretary of state who’s vowed to get rid of them.
Adieu .
 Overall, the said, prospects for peace are so dim now because of the Russia probe into " alleged" meddling  .  So how can this dangerous situation be defused ? This is why its a serious satire . Least we continue to accuse Trump as Putin's puppet  The "collusion" theory becomes obvious when we  look back at Obama who may have had also  help form Russia as well .  This is just a "theory".

(1)>>"alleged" Russian meddling .  . If it's a lie , its downright dangerous  one.   Even with the FBI special investigation on "Russian collusion" with the Trump campaign and administration taking place in the background,Putin  denied the allegations of Russian meddling in last year's U.S. presidential election as "fiction" invented by Democrats to divert the blame for their defeat. Putin repeated his strong denial of Russia's involvement in the hacking of Democratic National Committee emails that yielded disclosures that proved embarrassing for Hillary Clinton's campaign. Instead, he countered that claims of Russian interference were driven by the "desire of those who lost the U.S. elections to improve their standing." In reflecting on the ongoing scandal, which has seen constant, daily accusations of collusion and interference if no evidence (yet), Putin conceded that the damage has already been done and Russia's hopes for a new detente under Trump have been shattered by congressional and FBI investigations of the Trump campaign's ties to Russia. In the interview, Putin also said the accusations of meddling leveled at Russia have destabilized international affairs Going back to the hotly debated topic of "influencing" the election, Putin once again made a dangerous dose of sense when he argued that trying to influence the U.S. vote would make no sense for Moscow as a U.S. president can't unilaterally shape policies. "Russia has never engaged in that, we don't need it and it makes no sense to do it," he said. "Presidents come and go, but policies don't change. You know why? Because the power of bureaucracy is very strong." Especially when the bureaucracy in question is the so-called "deep state." (2)>>Obama may have been in close relations with the Russians . Nothing could be funnier than that . For most of his two terms in office, President Obama has downplayed the threat of Russia, famously deriding the warnings of Governor Mitt Romney during a 2012 presidential campaign debate with the line: “The Cold War’s been over for 20 years.” It's VARY SIMILAR to Donald Trump is doing NOW !!! . This why the whole thing is a "joke" to accuse Trump in collusion with Russia while Obama payed the same lip service. LOL! (3)>>The Barack Obama re-election campaign showcased the accomplishments of the reset policy. This Russia policy aligned with Obama’s general approach to national security. For years, Obama and his national security team argued that, by and large, America’s problems in the world resulted not from aggression or the ideological extremism of hostile actors abroad, but were the bitter fruit of America’s history of bullying, selfishness and militarism, especially during the George W. Bush administration. They complained that America had long been acting like a rogue nation, arrogant in defying the rights of others, self-serving in defining its interests in national rather than global terms, and unilateralist in refusing to constrain itself to actions approved by multilateral institutions or endorsed by progressive commentators (the latter often refer to themselves as "the international community"). They contended that the United States should be humble, out of a due sense of shame, and should adopt a "doctrine of mea culpa." (4)>>Just how the Russians got to the GOP to pick Trump .  Trump won the nomination of his party , if not by an "inner party" scheme involving House Republicans is a more likely scenario than a foreign government meddling . I called it a coup , maybe the puppet master is VP . Mike Pence , who knows , but the shadow knows ..............(5)>>Obama's alleged Marxist.  President Obama was a vary bad Marxist from the start . While the far right had to glue pieces of his past [ see :  ] to base the accusation . It is possible that Russia picked up on it as their "hopeful"  based on unfounded rumors .  He would be viewed as a radical in the American system of government . In every way he was , he tried to roll back many Bush decades long abuses during the War on Terror .  But in the end he wound up being attacked by the right , his current legacy to the nation is being erased by Donald Trump . (6)>>" Who are the crazies ?". Obama wanted the US to bomb Syria. The only thing that stopped him was overwhelming opposition among Americans. McCain went and did photo ops with Al Qaeda, but Obama and McCain together couldn't drag us into a war in Syria. So now they're trying with Ukraine. The establishment of both parties are quite literally insane.  (7)>>Kerry spouted " Putin you loose !" on national TV.  Putin’s “go­ing to lose on the in­ter­na­tion­al stage, Rus­sia is go­ing to lose, the Rus­si­an people are go­ing to lose,” if something doesn’t change, Kerry said. Putin will “lose all of the glow that came out of the Olympics,” and he’ll lose his So­chi G8 sum­mit. But then came a re­l­at­ive ham­mer: “He may not even re­main in the G8 if this con­tin­ues.” Some Re­pub­lic­ans, in­clud­ing Sen. Lind­sey Gra­ham, were already push­ing the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion Sunday to act to kick Rus­sia from the G8. Sen. Marco Ru­bio, in a Politico op-ed, wrote that “if Rus­si­an troops do not leave Ukraine im­me­di­ately, Rus­sia should be ex­pelled from [the G8] al­to­geth­er.” Pres­id­ent Obama hin­ted around the threat on Sat­urday in a 90-minute phone call with Putin him­self, say­ing that Rus­sia’s “stand­ing in the in­ter­na­tion­al com­munity” was at risk.  (8)>>"Getting along with Russia "  . Candidate Donald Trump made a bold prediction on the night he declared himself presumptive Republican nominee for president. "We're going to have a great relationship with Putin and Russia," Trump said at the April 2016 rally. The stark difference between reality and Trump's rhetoric suggests the president lacks a coherent foreign policy, international relations experts have said. As a result, Trump's intentions have been overridden by career government officials who do not share his desire for better relations with Moscow. We are seeing this with the Mueller investigation. The indictment of 13 Russians , lack of evidence   , the media constant bombardment of the American public that Russia is the enemy could be the work of something sinister driving both nations into a confrontation . What better way to start a war , accuse that nation with meddling in your politics .

Why John McCain lost . 
John McCain and Sarah Palin .{ see below } >>Barack Obama beat John McCain and Sarah Palin , the reason on the "surface" was that Obama was more a "populist" bringing "hope and change" , this  motto ran wild with a younger generation of voters . While McCain and Palin were viewed as out of touch , old guard vary strong  talking tough against Vladimir Putin on their campaign trail. Curiously A top political adviser in Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign helped arrange an introduction in 2006 between McCain and a Russian billionaire whose suspected links to anti-democratic and organized-crime figures are so controversial that the U.S. government revoked his visa. McCain lashed out at Putin and the Russian oligarchs, who, “rich with oil wealth and corrupt with power…[are] reassembling the old Russian Empire.” McCain rushed to publicly support the Georgian republic during its recent conflict with Russia and amplified his threat to expel Moscow from the G-8 club of major powers. His running mate, Sarah Palin, suggested in her first major interview that the United States might have to go to war with Russia one day in order to protect Georgia—the kind of apocalyptic scenario the United States avoided during the cold war. I can only see that the hypothetical reason why McCain lost to Obama was clear . He was anti -Russian , a pure war monger , AND if we buy the "story" that the Russian meddling in our election system  it may be that  Mr . McCain  just may have  it's first victim of the hacking of  [ by the Russians ]  by remote access to our  voting machines [LOL] &  to change the outcome of the lection  so that  Mr. Obama would win,the electoral collage delegation would enough delegates,  to him . It   looked vary close .  The win of Obama was by the way  sleek in every way . 

Saturday, February 24, 2018

The Syrian Apocalypse.

8And the king of Sodom and the king of Gomorrah and the king of Admah and the king of Zeboiim and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) came out; and they arrayed for battle against them in the valley of Siddim, 9against Chedorlaomer king of Elam and Tidal king of Goiim and Amraphel king of Shinar and Arioch king of Ellasar - four kings against five. 10Now the valley of Siddim was full of tar pits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and they fell into them. But those who survived fled to the hill country.…
New American Standard Bible  Genesis 14:8-10.
The Genesis quotation above is not about what is going on in Syria right now in the literal sense . 

(1.1)>>To illustrate how the nation of Syria has been invaded , Occupied between four nations , powers of the world. After years of civil war, Syria is now a country that lies in ruins. Thousands of people have died, millions have fled.With no end of the war in sight, groups continue to battle for control over large parts of the country. The Syrian government, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, known as ISIL), Kurdish factions, and several other rebel groups are still fighting for some of the most important parts of the country. Government troops, supported by Russian war planes, have gained some ground over the past few months, expelling ISIL from Palmyra, Raqqa and other important places. At the end of 2016, the Syrian government managed to capture Aleppo, one of the main battlegrounds in the conflict.  Meanwhile Kurdish fighters have made gains in the northern part of Syria, reducing the territory under control by ISIL.Turkish troops also joined the fight against ISIL, expelling the group from the city of Jarablus. ISIL has not only been losing territory in Syria, but also in Iraq, where the Kurds and the Iraqi Security Forces recently recaptured ISIL's last stronghold, Mosul.  The Islamic State no longer holds any significant ground in Syria and Iraq. What is left of it in a few towns of the Euphrates valley will soon be gone. Its remnants will be some of several terror gangs in the region. Local forces can and will hold those under adequate control. (1.2)>>The Islamic State is finished. This is why the Lebanese Hizbullah announced to pull back all its advisors and units from Iraq. It is the reason why Russia began to repatriated some of its units from Syria. Foreign forces are no longer needed to eliminate the remains of ISIL.  IN 2015 Joel Rosenberg is a Christian author, an expert on Christian “end times” discussions. He told MotherJones unidentified members of the U.S. Congress called him to Washington to consult on the biblical end of days. (2)>>Yes. Congress is concerned about the End of Days, as if they could just pass the “No to End of Days” Act and go on with life.  Syria has been one of the main testing grounds for Obama’s doctrine of relying on local proxy fighters instead of large-scale U.S. military deployments, reflecting his reluctance to be drawn back into unpopular ground conflicts like the Iraq war. Syria has reached an inflection point, and Trump  will have to shape a new response. The status quo hasn’t worked; quite to the contrary, it has destroyed an entire country, killing hundreds of thousands of people in the process while producing a raft of problems — including worsened relationships with allies like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel and the threat of state meltdown and regional collapse — that will bedevil the United States and its allies in the Middle East for decades to come.

President Obama's thin red line .
(3)>>During the Arab Spring , Syria became a target of American aggression not seen since the Vietnam war . While invading and occupying Iraq and Afghanistan during the last decade,the war on terror helped the  heaped up dead bodies and cost the United States trillions of dollars . Some of that money is not even accounted . Basic American tax payer money blown up . Creating a huge humanitarian crisis of escaping refugees .   The fall of the last rebel-held areas in the Syrian city of Aleppo could seal the fate of the “Obama Doctrine,” deepening (4)>>the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in decades and staining U.S. President Barack Obama’s legacy.  Former President Obama can thank his lucky stars for the inability of the US news media to focus on more than one story at a time. Their choice, reasonably enough, has been the fascinating and vastly colorful so called Russian meddling farce in  2016 presidential race. Otherwise it might have been the debacle that Washington’s Congress would be boiling it's policy over Syria. The Pro- American  al Qaeda's Syria branches which have been identified by the American government as "democratic freedom fighters " , have been since  armed in a conflict supporting the overthrow of Assad . Creating a four way conflict of armies fighting each other and ...{ Russia, Iran , Turkish , Kurds , Israelis and Americans }  the Islamic State , while at the same time fighting Syrian Assad backed American Rebels . Russians intervention in this conflict has generated a lot of controversy  of the western governments . (5)>>The Russians in my opinion have done a better job at stabilizing Syria , freeing Islamic State territories , liberating Christians , Muslims alike . While the American policy has been a debacle leaving corpses of Christians , Muslims . While I hope that my American leadership under Donald Trump will focus more on sitting down with more diplomatic  talks with all parties { Russia , Turkey and Iran} soon enough , let Syria , the Assad regime stay.   Decrying Aleppo's fall is a freebie. We don't have to consider who would have inherited a Western victory over Assad. As of two weeks ago, perhaps 8,000 to 10,000 rebel fighters were holed up under the constant weeks-long shelling of Aleppo. The majority of them were affiliated with al Qaeda's Syria branches. Aleppo has its share of civilians who are sympathetic to the rebels and mortally terrified and imperiled by Assad's regime. But those who escaped Aleppo earlier this year say that many other civilians are kept there as human shields and propaganda for the al Qaeda fighters who held the city. The fighting over the last five days has exposed as a dangerous fantasy the US hopes that its new interventionist policy would stabilise northern Syria. Instead of weakening President Bashar al-Assad and Iran, it will benefit them, showing the Kurds that they badly need a protector other than the US. The Kurds are now demanding that the Syrian Army go to Afrin to defend it against the Turks because it is an integral part of Syria. A military confrontation between Turkey and the US would be much in the interests of Tehran and Damascus. The Iranians, denounced by the US as the source of all evil, will be glad to see America in lots of trouble in Syria without them having to stir a finger.
Getting out of Syria , ending the Humanitarian crisis in a REASONABLE MANNER !
At the United Nations, a vote on a Security Council resolution demanding a 30-day humanitarian cease-fire across Syria was delayed until Saturday to try to close a gap over the timing of a halt to fighting.  A major first step would be to get the US out of the ME in any shape of form.  (6)>>The US and Russian approaches to dealing with the Syrian conflict are a study in contrasts. The United States failed "train and equip" program has become the butt of jokes in the Middle East. The White House's reluctance to act decisively in Syria is motivated by a number of factors: Its abhorrence of military interventionism, its misguided assumption that military action in Syria would have jeopardised nuclear negotiations with Iran, and its further misguided assumption that Assad's downfall will inevitably lead to ISIL taking Damascus.Putin's approach is to do all he can to protect the Assad regime. Russia has vetoed United Nations Security Council resolutions targeting the Syrian government. In the meantime, we are left with stories and images of devastation, as the bodies of children are pulled from under rubble, and schools, homes, hospitals and UN aid convoys are bombed. Six years of grinding war has left Syria a deeply fractured country. Yet this very fragmentation provides an opportunity for the Trump administration to work with Russia and key regional states to de-escalate the conflict and reach an enduring political settlement. Prior to 2011, Syria was a very advanced and almost westernized country. The women did not wear the Burqa. The men drank. Life was all right. It was in 2011 that the rebels attacked and they were supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel and NATO. Now, the result is that Syria has been reduced to almost rubble with over 7 million refugees leaving the country for Europe. It is time that Europe and the West should leave Assad to sort out his own issues or they will have the ignominy of facing the massive inflow of refugees.NATO is also to take the blame for this as they too supported the rebels. They asked not to send weapons to Syria and Trump was forced to bomb Syria as he was pushed into it by the Jewish Lobby and the Neo- Conservatives. Over a million refugees from Syria have fled to neighbouring Lebanon to escape the conflict. So, it is high time that the West should leave Syrian President Bashar al-Assad alone. What is required to properly resolve the Syrian conflict is for the major powers backing both regime and opposition camps to fundamentally change their long-held, self-interested policies and engage in meaningful talks that will see real concessions and compromises made. The outcome would ideally be some form of transitional power-sharing between those elements of the regime and opposition acceptable to the majority of Syrians and capable of effectively addressing their grievances. This transitional authority would then be in a unique position to take on and eventually defeat extremism in Syria, with the help and support of the wider international community. Perhaps stabilize and keep Syria unified .

(1.1)>>To illustrate how the nation of Syria has been invaded . The Syrian civil war contained multiple conflicts — Assad versus American-backed rebels, Assad versus jihadists (with the line between American-backed rebels and jihadists blurry indeed), rebels versus rebels, IS versus virtually everybody, and the American-led coalition versus IS.Stage two began with Vladimir Putin’s decisive entry into the conflict. Only the gullible believed he had arrived to fight IS. Whereas America’s goals were nebulous and idealistic (beat IS and somehow make peace), his goals were brutal and simple (crush Assad’s enemies and win the war), and he set about accomplishing his goals with ruthless efficiency. He largely left IS alone and instead bombed American-backed rebels and other anti-Assad militias into the dust. Gradually, the front stabilized. Gradually, Assad won key battles and recaptured key cities. Let’s put this in plain English. American forces and American allies are not only taking territory from IS, they’re holding that territory against regime forces. There’s a word for what happens when a foreign power takes and holds territory without the consent of the sovereign state — that word is “invasion.” In many ways, current American policy is a lighter-footprint, less ambitious version of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. We’re using local allies, but our own boots are on the ground, and we’re directly defending our forces and our allies from threats from Syria’s own government. (1.2)>>The Islamic State is finished.  I don't believe  US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson unexpectedly announced that American military forces would remain in Syria after the defeat of Isis. Their agenda was nothing if not ambitious: it included the stabilisation of the country, getting rid of Bashar al-Assad, rolling back Iranian influence, preventing the resurgence of Is and bringing an end to the seven-year Syrian war. Tillerson did not seem to care that this new departure was sure to offend a lot of powerful players in and around Syria and was quite contrary to past US pledges that it was only fighting in Syria to defeat Isis and had no other aims. (2)>>Yes. Congress is concerned about the End of Days.  The United States of America during the last two decades has brought the world closer to Armageddon by invading Iraq , Afghanistan and now Syria . The whole middle -east during the Arab Spring was set ablaze by American interference . Its UNCANNY , the One Nation Under God has been a  catalyst and antagonist in Middle East conflicts   It's quite likely that the Middle East has been spared from becoming the utter humanitarian disaster that most of postcolonial Africa has been only because of the presence of oil. While in the last half-century American oil interests have become dominant and have no doubt directly influenced political coups and wars in the region. The "nightmare" is boiling at the surface since the involvement of  Israel in the Syrian conflict . For years Israel has been striking at weapons stores and other facilities in Syria with a single goal - to disrupt and, as far as possible, to prevent advanced Iranian missiles being delivered to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Syria has often been the conduit for these shipments, but the changing balance of power there, with the survival of the regime of President Bashar al-Assad bolstered by Iranian help, has introduced a powerful new element - a direct Iranian role in the crisis. Its beginning to sound vary biblical with all the world powers converging in one spot. (3)>>During the Arab Spring. Obama and his team misread and mishandled the Arab Spring. As Joshua Landis explains in a remarkable, must-read interview, the U.S. response to these events — and especially Syria — was ill-conceived from the very start. In particular, Obama and his team mistakenly viewed the Arab Spring as a large-scale, grass-roots uprising clamoring for liberal democracy and embraced it too quickly. They also underestimated the ability of violent extremists to exploit power vacuums in failed states and the resilience of authoritarian regimes in places like Syria or Egypt. These misunderstandings led to Obama’s disastrous intervention in Libya, his inept diplomatic interference in Yemen, and the premature demand that “Assad must go” in Syria. President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials repeatedly insisted that this was “not about America.” In reality, it was partly about America, not just because of the past U.S. role in backing Arab dictatorships, but because of the critical role it would continue to play in the region. (4)>>the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in decades.   Syria’s civil war has created a humanitarian crisis of horrendous proportions. With most media comment focused on the struggle against Islamic State and the consequent gains and losses on the battlefield, far too little attention has been paid to the immeasurable suffering the conflict has inflicted on huge numbers of the Syrian people.  Civilian deaths as a result of the fighting and from poison gas attacks in the course of combat have been estimated at some 300,000. That, indeed, is a massive toll of innocent life. But the truly staggering statistics relate to the living.The country’s pre-war population was some 21 million. UN figures show that at the last count, on 28 September 2017, well over half the population – something approaching 12 million Syrians – had been displaced from their homes. Some 6.3 million are homeless within Syria, but no less than 5.2 million have fled the country and are now refugees – over half of them, it has been estimated, under the age of 18. This figure includes 2 million Syrians registered by UNHCR in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon, over 3 million registered by Turkey, and more than 30,000 Syrian refugees registered in North Africa. (5)>>The Russians in my opinion have done a better job at stabilizing Syria.One thing , the Russians want to keep the Syrian nation united , by respecting its territories  . While the US coalition has aided "terrorists" in the guise of " democratic  freedom fighters". Secondly , the United States is planning to divide Syria into various "states" than includes a homeland for the Kurds . While advocating the overthrow of  Assad , its so sneaky , I don't think many Americans know the covert actions of its government .  What's appalling to me as a American is that the nations media circus  spun a tale that "Russia is de -stabilizing Syria"  . It must be the worst crock of Sh**T I have ever heard . American intervention in Syria created a quagmire that forced Russia to enter and support Syrian leader Assad . The Truth is that By the end of the summer of 2015, various terrorist groups controlled about 70% of the territory of Syria, the IG's militants captured Rakku, Palmira, Manbij, a number of other strategically important settlements, transport communications, oil and gas fields.Government forces could not independently cope with the attack of militants, air strikes by the US-led international coalition against the IG also did not have the proper effect on terrorist groups. In this situation, the Syrian authorities appealed to Russia for help. August 26, 2015 was signed an interstate agreement on the deployment of Russian aviation in Syria. So far the Russians have provided humanitarian aide to the Syrians , Syrian Christians . Something completely lacking in my American counterpart .  (6)>>The US and Russian approaches.   I  always suspected that maybe some sinister organization is behind that propaganda that Russia hacked our election , the media going crazy over it with out a single evidence . At the same time who ever is responsible for that is creating a battle ground so Russia and America would go to war .  What's at stake for the U.S. being involved in a conflict that grows more complicated by the day? Everything, said former U.S. State Department official Matthew Hoh and former CIA counterterrorism analyst John Kiriakou Hoh and Kiriakou were accompanied by legal analyst Christie Edwards, and author and activist David Swanson. "We are on the brink with a war with Russia," Hoh told an audience at a National Press Club event .