Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 13, 2017

Organized Campaigns Hit At Trump's Foreign Policy Plans

At the end of his administration Obama implemented a series of anti-Russian moves. The most obvious was the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats over unfounded allegation of Russian interference in the U.S. elections. Other moves included the launching of an Ukrainian offense against the Russian supported resistance in the east Ukraine.

These moves were designed to impede the incoming Trump administration in its announced plans towards more friendly relations with Russia. The incoming Trump administration countered Obama's sanction move. Its designated National Security Advisor Flynn phoned up the Russian ambassador in Washington. He did not promise to immediately lift the sanctions but indirectly asked him to refrain from any harsh response:

The transcripts of the conversations don’t show Mr. Flynn made any sort of promise to lift the sanctions once Mr. Trump took office, the officials said. Rather, they show Mr.Flynn making more general comments about relations between the two countries improving under Mr. Trump, people familiar with them said.

This was arguably a sensible move in line with a smooth transition of government.

In the end the Russian government refrained from any in kind reaction to the Obama sanctions.

This was blow to the promoters of hostilities with Russia. It did not stop their meddling. The effort moved towards kicking Flynn out of his new position as NSC. A concerted media campaign was launched to insinuate an early Flynn failure and to press for his dismissal.

Bradd Jaffy @BraddJaffy
Within the last 30 mins — NYT, WashPost, WSJ and Politico each dropped pieces that have to be alarming for your future if you're Mike Flynn
5:51 PM - 12 Feb 2017

Keep in mind that some 95% of the U.S. media was hostile to Trump during the election campaign. They all peddled the nonsense of "Russian hacks" when an insider leaked emails from the Democratic National Council. They are all willing to support any move that might hinder the Trump administration.

Thus this morning news was filled with these headlines:

All these stories are based on "inside views" from multiple "former and current officials". All are build around the baseless allegations against Flynn of somehow colluding with the Russian government. All are likely more wishful thinking than fact.

It would be astonishing if Trump falls for this obviously well organized campaign against his administration. Should he fire Flynn or give in to such  pressure his enemies will smell blood, find a new target within his administration and intensify their fire.

Indeed a second well coordinated assault on an announced Trump policy, a change of course in Syria, is already in the making. This one aims at further maligning the Syrian government in an effort to make it impossible to argue for cooperation in the fight against the Islamic State.

  • A few days ago Amnesty International published an unfounded report about alleged executions in Syrian prisons.
  • Today Human Rights Watch claims that the Syrian government systematically used Chlorine in the fight over Aleppo. The sources are solely opposition supporters.
  • Based on similar vague "facts" the Atlantic Council, a NATO lobby with financial ties to Gulf governments, launches a huge propaganda report (large pdf) about the "war crime" of liberating Aleppo from Jihadis.

None of these "humanitarian" organization is concerned about the current devastating situation in Aleppo. For 40 days the water has been cut off by the Islamic State at the Euphrates pumping stations. There is no electricity. Fuel is sparse. Medications are difficult to find.

Their hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. These organizations all assert that the Syrian government, for example, attacked hospitals in east-Aleppo solely to hit civilians. At the same time they all applaud a much bigger assault on the Islamic State held Mosul by U.S. and Iraqi troops. There, the head of Human Rights Watch asserts, the hospitals are used by the Jihadis and thus attacks on them are justified:

Kenneth Roth @KenRoth
As battle for Mosul proceeds, ISIS is regularly occupying hospitals & medical facilities, endangering patients/staff

The anti-Flynn campaign as well as the bad-Assad campaign are aimed at Trump policy changes. These changes move away from the course the borg implemented throughout the Obama reign.

Meanwhile the Trump administration implements regressive economic and social policies without any noticeable resistance in the media, in Congress or from so called Non-Government-Organizations:

President Trump has embarked on the most aggressive campaign against government regulation in a generation, joining with Republican lawmakers to roll back rules already on the books and limit the ability of federal regulators to impose new ones.

The borg or deep state is way more concerned with keeping up its plans of uncontested global dominance than with the welfare of the citizens within the empire.

Trump promised to put "America first", to prioritize the inner well being of the States over the quest for global hegemony. His voters elected him for that purpose. Should he fall for the organized campaigns against his plans predictable foreign policy disasters will dominate his presidency. He will then lose any chance for reelection.

Posted by b on February 13, 2017 at 01:38 PM | Permalink

« previous page


The faction represented by Trump's Cabinet: Wall Street, MIC, Zionists. That would be the entire deep state.


Apparently, Putin's the one that triggered an intelligence investigation, when his reaction to the Obama sanctions was so uncharacteristic. Intelligence services were suspicious and conducted an investigation and found out about the call because the government uses a FISA warrant to tap the Russian Ambassador's phone. Here's the thing though; wouldn't Flynn know this? Methinks Flynn was reckless and of course Trump who's a neophyte in the game is also careless.

It occurred to me that Flynn was a disgruntled member of the Obama administration. So what does he do? He appears on RT as a semi-regular analyst and criticizes the Obama administration on Al-Jazeera and RT. So then he gets invited to the RT Gala, where he's surrounded by the creme de la creme of Russian politics. So what's going through Putin's mind? If I were Putin I'd be thinking: Hmmm, what a gift; a whale of a fish! High-ranking U.S. official, pissed off with his government falls into our hands like a gift from heaven. So, how can we exploit this opportunity? Like I stated earlier: we don't have the whole picture here.

Here's one of the criticisms Flynn made of Obama's Syria policy:

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Flynn criticized the Obama administration for its delay in supporting the opposition in Syria, thereby allowing for the growth of Al Nusra and other extremist forces: "when you don’t get in and help somebody, they’re gonna find other means to achieve their goals" and that "we should have done more earlier on in this effort, you know, than we did."

So imagine if the opposition in Syria got all the support they needed from the U.S. as Flynn wanted? Libya redux, anyone?

Also, did you all know this about Flynn:

Flynn, along with son Michael G. Flynn, runs Flynn Intel Group which provides intelligence services for business and governments.[35] Several sources, including Politico, have written that Flynn's consulting company is allegedly lobbying for Turkey. A company tied to Erdoğan's government, which supports Muslim Brotherhood, is known to have hired Flynn's lobbying firm.[36][37][38][39][40][41] On election day 2016, Flynn wrote an op-ed calling for U.S. backing for Erdoğan's government and criticized the regime's opponent, Fethullah Gulen; Flynn did not disclose that Flynn's consulting firm had received funds from a company with ties to Erdoğan's government.[42] In July 2016, Flynn said that the coup attempt against Erdoğan was something “worth clapping for”, but two months later, when a company tied to Erdoğan's government hired Flynn's firm, Flynn hailed Erdoğan as a critical U.S. ally.[43]

Flynn sat in on classified national security briefings with then-candidate Trump at the same time that Flynn was working for foreign clients, which raises ethical concerns and conflicts of interest.

Source Wikipedia.

So one day he applauded the coup against Erdogan; and the next he's all in for Erdogan.

Flynn is pretty reckless. Foreign governments like important U.S. officials who are reckless and disgruntled and who can be influenced.

Add to all this that Flynn was behind the escalation against Iran. We're putting Iran on notice!

Looks like Flynn was the one put on notice. Lol.

Are ya really gonna miss him??? I'm not.

All this aside though - we don't have the whole picture yet, and it's important that we do. Don't you want the truth? I want to know what's hidden here. My gut feeling is we're getting the tip of the iceberg that's in the way of the Trump Titanic.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 2:35:46 AM | 101

@55 c-del-t, 'In my view Trump is anathema (less so than Clinton probably would have been) yet the opposition to Trump is based on the myth that is America.'

i think you're right ...

Thai Planned Parenthood Unfazed by Trump’s Global Gag Order

“Let me inform you that it won’t affect us at all,” Montri Pekanan said. “We are funded by the IPPF [International Planned Parenthood Federation], who is in turn supported by many developed countries, not only the United States.”

A majority of the budget for the Planned Parenthood Association of Thailand, or PPAT, is provided by domestic sources such as the government, health foundations and private donors, according to 2015 data. International aid accounts for less than a third of its total budget.

... so what's this about? it's about loading all the sins of the usa on the tee-rump, aka the scapegoat, and running him out of town - or killing him, it's been done - to the benefit of the same old powers that are in amer-ee-ka.

the 'masters' of the media plan to give america a facelift ... they've noticed that their excesses of the past decade-and-a-half have not played well to 'the house' ... and so they will 'sacrifice' tee-rump & his deplorables in their faux renewal of the 'american brand'.

planned parenthood, the wall along the mexican border, the shiaa muslim ban ... all those peripheral issues made anathema ... while worldwide the day-in and day-out american death, devastation, destruction, and - especially - deceit, proceed apace, nay quicken.

this all makes me want to puke. i feel i am not the only one.

Posted by: jfl | Feb 14, 2017 2:37:49 AM | 102

Well that might have been the last chance for peace with Russia now being removed.
This is serious since Flynn was the guy that actually pushed for real peace with Russia.

This is another win for MSM and neocon warmongers. Damnit!

Prepare for a change on Russia with Trump, for the worse.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 2:40:19 AM | 103

Boy, Trump sure goes for MIC Inc.!

Meet the third candidate in the running for Flynn's job.:

So we have to generals; Kellogg and Petraeus and one Admiral.

Aye...things never change.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 2:52:25 AM | 104

I have to admit I am puzzled by why the elite are fighting amongst themselves and don't have a clue what the definition/goals of the sides are.

It seems that the Trump futurists that want war with Iran and China instead of Russia have a geopolitical world view different from the neocons that want war with Russia. From a MIC profit point of view, does it matter? How does either move empire forward? Who makes money under each path and who loses?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 14, 2017 3:01:27 AM | 105


This is serious since Flynn was the guy that actually pushed for real peace with Russia.

Yeah, while he pushed for real war with Iran!

Don't you know by now that Neocons are always in a win-win position no matter who's the deep-state's puppet leader? Neocons are the deep-state enforcers. The goal is always the same; the puppet leaders just differ on how to get there.

Here's the thing; whatever card Putin was holding has just been turned over to the deep-state. Oh, and have you considered that maybe the deep state knew all along that Putin was holding something over Trump and that's why he was their man over Hillary? How can you get a puppet to do your dirty work if not with a little blackmail?

Trump's the deep-state's man; Flynn fall guy. The Empire marches on.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 3:04:34 AM | 106

The Trump admin seems to be an add-hock bunch of misfits all pulling in different directions, rather than a team all working towards a common goal. Under total attack from the media, it is already breaking down. Interesting times.

Posted by: Peter AU | Feb 14, 2017 3:26:55 AM | 107


"If ninety five percent of the media were against Trump, they would have treated his campaign for the Republican nomination the way they treated Bernie Sanders campaign. That is, they would have minimized it and their coverage, instead of giving billions in free publicity."

I recall the media broadcasting an empty podium waiting for Trump to arrive while ignoring Clinton giving a speech on improved job opportunities for the handicapped.

That summed up the tone and nature of the coverage for me.

Meanwhile, those "evil media" have "hounded" the poor, innocent Mr. Flynn out of office just like they did with Sarah Palin...

Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 14, 2017 3:34:38 AM | 108

#88, #90

I admire the optimism of you Trumpovniks.

I am happy for Trump winning. No matter how hard he tries he will likely achieve little, if anything at all, and leave in some kind of engineered disgrace, possibly violently, but he will expose so much wrong within the US state like few others could.

He is the right person to end the last delusion about America being able to lead the "free world", and about "free world".

What emerges is an unmistakeable silouhette of a profoundly sinister deep state entity.

Posted by: Quadriad | Feb 14, 2017 4:11:07 AM | 109

#105 Pete Oz

"rather than a team all working towards a common goal"

"Under total attack from the media, it is already breaking down"

Stalin and Pol Pot would execute billions to have this kind of unified, one voice, common goal US MS media. In America, they can be all bought for a few shekels.

Luckily, the US Media can still help kill billions - in fact they probably will. Mazel Tov!

Posted by: Quadriad | Feb 14, 2017 4:24:37 AM | 110

Flynn's gone and if he's replaced by a war mongering neo-CON, then the future is grim.

Posted by: Greg Bacon | Feb 14, 2017 7:02:31 AM | 111

FFS, this Michael Moore is turning out a slimy character in the making.

Mr Guns for Columbine would rather have H. Clinton and WW3 with Russia/China?

Must be a full moon rising over there.

"Donald Trump should be arrested over Michael Flynn's talks with Russia, Michael Moore says"

Link to Michael Moore says

Posted by: x | Feb 14, 2017 7:24:52 AM | 112

Flynn's gone and if he's replaced by a war mongering neo-CON, then the future is grim

can you point out any of these goobers who aren't war mongering neocons? or hardcore adherents or acolytes in the wings, they're all crocked on American exceptionalism, America First being the national libation.

Posted by: john | Feb 14, 2017 7:53:18 AM | 113

...but (Trump) he will expose so much wrong within the US state like few others could.
He is the right person to end the last delusion about America being able to lead the "free world", and about "free world".
What emerges is an unmistakeable silouhette of a profoundly sinister deep state entity.

Posted by: Quadriad | Feb 14, 2017 4:11:07 AM | 107

I think there are a great many who share exactly these sentiments..not exactly Trump supporters, but who saw a unique candidate and are now happy to witness the unforeseen exposé. The many of these types who voted for Trump are not open in their support, who remain the silent majority, even in victory. A type of sad triumph.

Though, I think the President Trump Show is a lot better reality TV than whatever was going to be programmed on TrumpTV™ had he lost to Hellary. Best election cycle ever. Stock in popcorn up, up, up.

Measured against other empires throughout history, it was a rather short, embarrassing reign, in the end reduced to printing money for proxy over extended by war efforts, like many before them...even their it's peak victory, WWII, was someone else's - Russia. Not that "publishing houses" would permit Hollywood to allow the public the headspace to entertain that possibility.

The ending is the capitalist version of what happened to the USSR. Yet the banks will continue to take their pound of flesh beyond - the entity that defies sovereign limits. Modern day Templars.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Feb 14, 2017 7:56:56 AM | 114

Circe in a frenzy

@99: The "entire deep state" is behind Trump

@104: "... maybe the deep state knew all along that Putin was holding something over Trump and that's why he was their man over Hillary?"

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 14, 2017 7:58:05 AM | 115

@Jackrabbit 114
Yeah, its frothing up. This one was top shelf though:

I need to prepare my comment and reread the opinion here.
Posted by: Circe | Feb 13, 2017 10:58:32 PM | 65

Paid by the minute, or word...?

Posted by: MadMax2 | Feb 14, 2017 8:22:06 AM | 116

Re: Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 12:49:46 AM | 89

You need to explain to me why Deep State frontman Trump and his NeoCon buddies so wanted their NeoCon friend Michael Flynn as the NSA and yet want to get rid of him a fellow NeoCon a month later.

It makes no sense.

As you say, Trump's administration is filled with NeoCons like Flynn - so why would the NeoCons agree on a plan involving Flynn talking with the Russians and then use this same call that they set up as an excuse to get rid of one of the administrations NeoCons?

Makes no sense Circe.

Posted by: Julian | Feb 14, 2017 8:35:25 AM | 117

@Observer, 54.

The US controls the world economy via the world's reserve currency

This is a tiresome shtick. Yes, control of currency is important but as recent events showed--by far not the only thing. US control of currency rests on US real and perceived military power. Take away this power and the tower crumbles and that is what happened in the last 8-10 years. Great Corelli Barnett had this to say: power of the nation-state by no means consist only in its armed forces, but also in its economic and technological resources; in the dexterity, foresight and resolution with which its foreign policy is conducted; in the efficiency of its social and political organization. It consists most of all in the nation itself, the people, their skills, energy, ambition, discipline, initiative; their beliefs, myths and illusions. And it consists, further, in the way all these factors are related to one another. So, this pure "economism" by now is a beaten to death cliche. A fever pitch hysteria about Russia in US is precisely about the fact that most of those "theories" promoted for the last 25+ years turned out to be a complete crap.

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Feb 14, 2017 8:53:24 AM | 118

b: ...with keeping up its plans of uncontested global dominance...

SmoothieX...There is a lot of wrong with this statement on very many levels. What "global dominance"? US can not win a single war...[etc.]

...What "domination" are we talking about?...

Winning wars has nothing to do with it. The 95 per cent of the world's peoples who are living outside the narrow confines of duh'merica (as an astoundingly large fraction of my gentle, sober-minded, intellectual, phlegmatic friends and acquaintances refer to the E1) can immediately answer the question you pose in one word. Globalisation. The term is synonymous with Americanisation. More than the outward paraphernalia, the rapine, plunder, exploitation, trade wars, trade treaties and so on, far more than those, it is that that people find offensive, vile, putrid, frightening, about the USA's interference on the world "stage". The mission. The cultural imperialism. The dismal "melting-pot" mentality. The cultural soup. The brash anti-intellectualism.
Those other factors, they come and go, wax and wane, they can all be overcome. Even the war-waging and the war-mongering. Aggressors will always be overcome eventually and taught a lesson. Usually bloody, in the end. But it's that destructive "cultural" mission, lurking behind the overt bullying, invasion, economic pressure towards liberalisation, monetisation, corporatisation, it's that that is utterly dominant.

Posted by: Petra | Feb 14, 2017 9:18:41 AM | 119

- Flynn's resignation will definitely have a negative impact on the relationship between Russia & the US.
- Wasn't he able to choose a more concealed way of talking to the russians ? By simply talking to one or more russians personally.

Posted by: Willy2 | Feb 14, 2017 9:30:25 AM | 120


Apparently there are spies everywhere, Trump cant do anything before someone leaks it.
Although what crime have Flynn commited? None, so this is just another way to hurt Trump and the usual mix of antirussian hatred in the west. This is ugly and dangerous as this hurt the peace. I dont see why Trump and Flynn accept this campaign against them.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 9:40:13 AM | 121

@Petra, 118.

Winning wars has nothing to do with it.

Winning wars has everything to do with it because a war is a cultural affair first and foremost. War is also a pinnacle of industrial, scientific and technological development--most complex things humanity ever created are weapon systems. For admirers of iPhones and Ivy League madrasas' humanities "educated" ignoramuses it is always a shock to learn this simple fact. Wars shaped and continue to shape history. US "dominance" in the second half of the 20th century came about because of the war--WWII. How it came about is a separate discussion. This "dominance" also is crumbling as I type this precisely because of the revelation of the real state of the US "power projection" capabilities and the state is not that great, to put it mildly. US political class "overstretched" itself and the US precisely for the reasons of being completely ignorant on the issue of application of military power and of not being conditioned by war, unlike it is the case with many other nations. If you'd have known the history of the 19th and 20th Centuries you wouldn't have stated what I quoted from your post above. Obviously even Arnold Toynbee had no inhibitions on writing his "War And Civilization".

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Feb 14, 2017 10:02:16 AM | 122

I wholeheartly support the firing of Flynn. He is a Neo-con in disguise infiltrated in the Trump administration. He has been pushing Trump in the neo-con favorite paths: "demonize and regime change" Good riddance!

it may be appropriate to return to the book written by Flynn and Michael Ledeen earlier this year, The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies. ....
Yet Flynn appears to diverge from this position, listing this as one of five goals that constitute “winning” (a favorite word of his, as well as Trump’s):

Bringing a direct challenge to the regimes that support our enemies, weakening them at a minimum, bringing them down whenever possible.

Indeed, Flynn sounds positively neoconservative in his eagerness to bring about regime change in authoritarian or totalitarian nations:

Removing the sickening chokehold of tyranny, dictatorships, and Radical Islamist regimes must be something our nation stands for whenever freedom-loving people around the world need help. If we don’t stand for this, we stand for nothing. [How Flynn reconciles this with his fawning admiration for Egypt’s President el-Sisi is not something he ever really tries to explain.]

Moreover, in a passage comparing Jimmy Carter with Obama (“the two worst presidents we’ve ever elected”), he writes:

Reagan knew what both Carter and now Obama reject: that America is the one truly revolutionary country in the world, and part of our national mission is to support democratic revolutionaries against their oppressors.

More on Flynn’s (and Ledeen’s) Book by Jim Lobe

Posted by: virgile | Feb 14, 2017 10:04:38 AM | 123

Here’s a look at the top named contenders for the post, which does not require Senate confirmation: Keith Kellogg

Kellogg had previously been appointed the National Security Council chief of staff and, along with Flynn, advised Trump on national security and foreign policy issues during the campaign. He had been considered for national security adviser before the post went to Flynn.

Kellogg was chief operating officer of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, the interim governing body following the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. He previously worked as executive vice president of research and technology for Virginia-based information technology firm CACI International, which works as a contractor for defense, intelligence and homeland security agencies.
David Petreaus

The most audacious choice would likely be former CIA director David Petreaus. Petraeus, a retired four star general, was bounced from his position atop the intelligence agency in 2012 after he it was revealed that he passed on classified information to his biographer, who had also become his mistress.

But Trump during the campaign spoke sympathetically about Petreaus’ plight despite his frequent criticisms of his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified materials. Petreaus was briefly under consideration to become secretary of state before Trump picked Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson.
Robert Harward

Robert Harward, a Navy SEAL, served as Deputy Commander of the United States Central Command when it was under the command of Gen. James Mattis, who is now secretary of defense. He served on the National Security Council for President George W. Bush and commissioned the National Counter Terrorism Center.

Upon retirement in 2013 after a nearly 40-year career in the navy, Harward took a post as a CEO for defense and aerospace giant Lockheed Martin in the United Arab Emirates. Trump has recently been in very public negotiations with Lockheed over the cost of its F-35 fighter jet program.

Keith Kellogg on White House shortlist of possible replacements for Flynn

Posted by: virgile | Feb 14, 2017 10:09:54 AM | 124

I think a fair reading of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations leads to the conclusion that eavesdropping on the telephone calls of an ambassador, at any rate the official ones, is prohibited. Article 27(1) says, "The receiving State shall permit and protect free communication on the part of the mission for all official purposes." Article 27(2)-(3) makes it clear, I think, what "protect" means: "2.The official correspondence of the mission shall be inviolable. Official correspondence means all correspondence relating to the mission and its functions.
3.The diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained."

Posted by: lysias | Feb 14, 2017 10:17:01 AM | 125

We should not forget that before the Russian scandal, Trump has on TV put the blame on Flynn for the rush and the ensuing chaos that followed the ban executive order.
It seems that Trump was already unhappy with Flynn's advice and he may have used the Russian intercept to fire him.

Posted by: virgile | Feb 14, 2017 10:18:05 AM | 126

It's basically Bosworth field, the battle is over, now the real war starts, to get your guy into a position of power while using any means necessary to remove the other guy. Giving the other faction a bloody nose.
Just cos your a general and the other guy is a general doesn't mean you are comrades in arms.

Posted by: Heath | Feb 14, 2017 10:25:11 AM | 127

@112 john, 'can you point out any of these goobers who aren't war mongering neocons?'

no, i can't.

@116 julian, 'Trump's administration is filled with NeoCons like Flynn - so why would the NeoCons agree on a plan involving Flynn ...'

yeah, why would they?

i think that the answer is to forget about taking sides in this squabble. none of these people are on our side, no matter who we are.

we got no skin in this game. none of us.

they are all arrayed against us, fighting for their respect sides, thief against thief, over the spoils.

which we are to provide.

what we need to do is work on building an alternative to these freaks.

nothing good will come from any of them.

Posted by: jfl | Feb 14, 2017 10:45:48 AM | 128

Trump foreign policy agendas during the election were about defeating ISIS in Syria and Iraq (in cooperation with Russia). That agenda seems to have taken a back seat to confrontation with Iran. Any such moves would just be another Iraq:

These comments are setting the framework for a new policy toward Iran. If they’re not careful, Trump and his military advisers may risk boxing themselves into a position where they have to respond forcefully to any future Iranian missile tests or meddling in the region. Beyond that danger, the new administration needs Iran’s cooperation in its fight against Islamic State, in both Syria and Iraq. Trump has identified that battle as his highest foreign policy priority. On Jan. 28 he signed an executive order giving the Pentagon and national security officials 30 days to submit a plan for “defeating” Islamic State.

Now, that's one executive order that's gotten very little press coverage - curious, isn't it?

Regardless, Trump remains one of the few to acknowledge that going into Iraq was a massive strategic failure; hopefully he'll be unwilling to repeat it. In contrast, Bush, Clinton and the deep state (i.e. (1)military-industrial contractors, (2)Congressional funds-providers, (3)Pentagon/State/CIA etc. bureaucrats, and (4)the mass media PR types and think tanks) all supported that and still do. So obviously the deep state wanted either Bush or Clinton, and didn't really care which. Now they have an unpredictable quantity (Trump) that they're trying to force into compliance with their agenda - and the recent troop movements in eastern Europe, set in motion during the Obama lame-duck session, is part of that effort.

The issue is really deep state failure, however. Any rational person not inside the corrupt ring-of-power that lives off the bloated $600 billion U.S. military budget recognizes that it should be cut by 50% and those funds should be redirected to domestic infrastructure, education, public health - everything other industrialized countries like Germany and Japan spend money on.

The deep state in contrast argues that we need to maintain global military power to prop up the petrodollar and sabotage any competing economies, we need to keep expanding influence into Central Asia and the Middle East and Eastern Europe and North Africa and Southeast Asia and Central and South America, that's how the "New American Century" of imperial wealth and power can be maintained.

The fact is, the deep state argument is complete and utter bullshit; the American people don't benefit from these stupid imperial agendas, only a small group of corrupt insiders do. The American public mostly recognizes this fact, and that's a major reason why Hillary Clinton lost the election, and very nearly lost the primary to Bernie Sanders (who started off the primary polling at 5%); that's also why the whole Republican field was defeated by a novice outsider, Donald Trump, (who wasn't even considered worthy of including in polls at the start of the Republican primary).

So the deep state is going to try to justify its existence with more wars; defeating ISIS doesn't work for them since that requires cooperation with Iran and Russia in Syria. Iran is implausible; Yemen less so, and Trump will is unlikely to be as cooperative as Clinton would have been. Clinton was the vehicle for deep state ambitions; with her epic failure, they're scrambling like crazy. Deck chairs on the Titanic.

Posted by: nonsense factory | Feb 14, 2017 10:46:54 AM | 129

SmoothieX12: ...because a war is a cultural affair first and foremost. War is also a...

Of course it is all of those. That war shapes history both directly and indirectly through, for example, technological advances, is well-argued and incontestable. But that doesn't address my point. War is an effective way of imposing cultural dominance: arguably the most effective way and certainly the most sudden and disruptive way. But... but it is not a necessary way. It is abundantly clear that USA cultural imperialism has been and is being pushed through a multitude of channels, traversing the world prior to as well as during periods of way-mongering. It was been pushed into all territories, whether aligned, neutral or hostile to USA and all the coarseness it represents. From the obvious domineering over international bodies, IMF, WB, BIS, UN organs, etc. at one end of the scale to various bilateral and multilateral treaties, to levels as (relatively) trite as the film and tv industries, and much in between. There is a plethora of means, both formal and incidental. Americanisation is so rampant and cancerous, we don't even recognise it for what it is.

Posted by: Petra | Feb 14, 2017 10:48:40 AM | 130

Thank you, Circe @99 - you have made me feel much better about the resignation of Flynn. (Also comments later fleshing out Flynn's background and pointing to Michael Moore's scurrilous charge against Trump.) Not knowing what is in Trump's mind, I can't really speculate on the decision, but it is apparent that the big problem wasn't relations with Russia, which country has actually benefited from the imposition of sanctions, having solidified its own 'made in Russia' program while the imposition of checks from outside has been imposed. The Russians themselves may be quite willing to wait this out, but the issue of Iran's 'evil' designs, and preparations for an imposed war in that direction was becoming increasingly dire. Iran is proud of never having begun a war - they very much think of themselves as in preparation to defend against an attacker (which is what Trump has said is his own goal for the US). The position is supposed to be about national security, so it's very much to be hoped Trump can find someone who has that as his or her goal. How about that Hawaian lady folk admire? She's seen firsthand what our wars of aggression accomplish. Which is very much not making this country more secure. Whoever it will be, I'm betting Trump already knows who he wants. And nobody else pushed him into this; he's the decider (to quote one of our un-presidents).

Posted by: juliania | Feb 14, 2017 10:54:59 AM | 131

From the obvious domineering over international bodies, IMF, WB, BIS, UN organs, etc.

That is the whole point: the de-dollarization is ongoing as I type this, regional banks, including major Chinese effort, are popping up everywhere. It has to be understood that Pax Americana, the US Dollar and financial system which derives from it had in their foundation mythology of US military power. Namely, its power projection capability. After the collapse of the USSR the process of US deindustrialization accelerated tremendously. Today, US Dollar is not supported by anything (as it was the case earlier in 1950s and 60s with massive US industrial potential) other than a handful of blue chip companies such as Boeing and the main pillar on which Dollar rested was US military "might". This pillar has crumbled due to incompetence, wrong choices and delusion. The results are in. The jury is also in. Consider this simple fact: could US have attacked Russia's Central Bank as many suggested? Absolutely! But there was one problem should this attack have been mounted--Russia would have survived just fine, but US-designed financial system would not. This "nuclear" option would have completely undermined already shaky trust in global financial institutions. The attack never came and everyone knew who blinked first. Sanctions failed, the military bluff has been called and there you are: within last three years multi-polarity is not just a concept anymore, it is a fait accompli. Check 14 points which Huntington (quoting Nye) listed in 1996 as fundamentals of combined West's superiority. The only thing which is left today is International Banking System. Once one moves Russia into the not-West category a picture becomes really disturbing for many "exceptionalists".

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Feb 14, 2017 11:22:59 AM | 132

Virgile juliana

Uh its a good thing that a guy that proposed good relations with russia is removed through a campaign by warmongering antirussian establishment?

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 11:29:19 AM | 133


Unlike you, I actually READ other people's opinions here as I research the topic. The only reason I wrote that is because there was breaking news on Flynn's resignation while I was perusing the comments. So I wanted people to know about the resignation, but still wanted time to type out my comment @99 - quit interpreting everything with bullshit assumptions.


What that ignorant non-argument demonstrates is that you can't stand it when I'm right and you especially can't stand it when inconvenient facts get in the way of your man-god Trump.

Did you see my previous comment @99 on Flynn on the 1st page?

If the deep-state has dirt on Trump they can hold over him; then he's much more willing to do their dirty work. Ergo, Trump loaded his cabinet with warmongering MIC generals, Wall Street and Zionists: Friedman, Miller, Kushner and of course some of the Zionist Wall Street appointees. It's a cabinet that mirrors the deep state.

Flynn is gone to protect Trump. Flynn, as I wrote in my other comment was reckless and he has been reckless in other ways I listed in that post. But the fact is, that we really don't have the full picture here, and people are right to dig because what we don't need is deep deception and corruption in government. What we do need is for the whole rotten corrupt system to be exposed. If Trump is the dice that topples all the rest of the rotten scum; then I for one will be ecstatic, while you have another agenda that involves spinning and enabling the deception and status quo. I want the whole damn truth to take down the whole damn system once and for all.

So you can try and try to muzzle me with your ad homs, and your campaign to discredit me; but I'm going to continue to fight for the truth, ALL the truth!

What really, really bothers you is that you just can't spin all the inconvenient facts pouring out of this administration (like the recent one; the award to the Saudis for their contribution to peace and fighting terrorism-LOL!). One inconvenient fact after another that demonstrate how deep-state owned Trump really is.

Suck it up and accept reality already; your man-god Trump is very compromised. The only good thing is that Trump is the corrupt catalyst that might likely bring the whole rotten structure down with him. My hope is that when he falls the whole system comes tumbling down as well. What could be better than that? The fact that you're fighting for the opposite outcome speaks volumes about your goal here. A tool enabling the latest corrupt puppet of a corrupt system can't have honorable intent. Why don't you just come out and admit why you just can't let go of Trump-god no matter how much he proves he's all in with the deep-state's corruption? I laid it all out; I have nothing to hide: I'm gunning for deception and corruption. I want the 2-party monopoly, and the deep state that owns it to come crashing down, Trump included because he's part of the corruption. The ball's in your court. How can you not want that? I'm waiting...

Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 11:40:58 AM | 134


Your statement depends very much on the media analysis. Other analysis suggests otherwise. We'll have to wait and see, but of course the media is always so honest, fair and accurate - not!

Posted by: juliania | Feb 14, 2017 11:49:17 AM | 135


I really appreciate your informative posts. I'm often just commenting on what I absorb from hardworking commenters here, in conjunction with b's excellent introductions to the subject at hand. It's a bit like that scary eye in the hobbit sagas - the feeling is that it has shifted from looking at Russia for the moment, and is seeking out pretenses for a confrontation with Iran - not that it has given up on Russia, and why not kill two birds with one stone?

"They're scrambling like crazy." If we can avoid war with Iran, I will read it that way.

Posted by: juliania | Feb 14, 2017 12:00:27 PM | 136


Nonsense. Some things are facts here. Flynn wanted real peace with Russia and had the will along Trump to make that peace. Now hes removed just because (just because!) he apparently had a nice conversation with the russian ambassador. And who waged this campaign against him? Antitrump and antirussian media, politicians.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 12:17:09 PM | 137

@64 khalid and @71 OJS - thanks for your comments.

@ 118/129 petra and @121/131 smoothie. thanks for having that conversation.. petra - i really relate to everything you articulate and appreciate smoothies responses to you as well.. regarding the question of world financial dominance, it seems to me the us$ is still in a very dominant position.. how much of this has to do with the financial structures like the imf, bank of international settlements, etc, petrodollar, relationships with saudi arabia and etc. etc., i don't really know, but i tend to see it like petra more here... i personally think all this continues to make a difference, but i also see the merit in winning a war, or making a solid statement on the nature of war as russia has indeed done in the syrian conflict.. the usa/western europe are on the back foot, trying to use propaganda - chemical weapons, hanged prisoners, etc. etc. while russia has dominated the ground itself.

@128 nonsense factory.. thanks for your comments as always..

Posted by: james | Feb 14, 2017 12:27:28 PM | 138

Flynn already did what the elites wanted, I think. He ramped up the war on Iran, which is a backdoor to war with Russia. Good job, on to the speaking circuit with you, Sir! Next!

Folks are always looking for the elites to propagate coherent policies. Yes their policies are coherent but on a deeper level. On the surface they are always changing their footing. Trump is particularly good for that. There is a lot of aikido to the elites' game. They use the energy and passion of those who oppose them to compromise and defeat their opponents. Flynn played his role.

There is a lot of bait and switch too. War with Russia is off the table but war with Iran is on the table. TPP is off the table, but even worse treaties are proceeding. We need to be able to read patterns in a more complicated way, on the one hand, while reading more simply on the other hand, less easily distracted by superficial events. The elites are magicians, always getting us to watch the hand that isn't as important. We must be artists, experts at reading patterns, at seeing the unseen through the seen.

Posted by: paul | Feb 14, 2017 12:29:36 PM | 139


Wanting peace with Russia and war with Iran seem irreconcilable to me. Now, Trump may prove to have had these irreconcilable urges also. Some think he has, and his comments certainly cloud the issue. b has pointed out this will certainly damage his presidency if it turns out as you and the media have prognosticated. As I said, we'll have to wait and see.

Posted by: juliania | Feb 14, 2017 12:39:25 PM | 140

‘Flynn’s resignation victory for mainstream media & Democrats’ – ex-Pentagon official to RT

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 12:40:38 PM | 141

If 95% of the media were against Trump, they would have treated his campaign for the Republican nomination the way they treated Bernie Sanders campaign. That is, they would have minimized it and their coverage, instead of giving billions in free publicity. If 95% of the media were against Trump, they would have given his opponents a free ride. ..… s @ 8.

s, I get it, just, another pov.

The MSM has joined the PTB (which is not equivalent to the Deep State) and openly taken sides, have hoisted themselves up to ‘deal breaker’ status because they hold a certain kind of control. (Tech cos., Google, etc. the same.) The history is way too complex for a short post, and “control of the media by 6 corps (US)” is not, you will agree, sufficient explanation.

The MSM-TV sought commercial gain, and ‘being smart’ about that entailed offering Trump-time (> views, adverts, sales, clicks, etc. etc.) - See any tabloid, any scandal that can make headlines…

With the expectation, as assured from ‘above’ and ‘pundits’ etc. I presume, that Trump would lose. They did not expect Trump to win. They were just playing the usual media game and were simultaneously semi-subservient to their masters. The print press, - low man on the pole, losing revenues etc. + hyper desperate, endorsed Killary almost 100%. (Hoping to become a main prop organ.)

In a way, stretching and simplifying a bit, two different models clashed and were not sucessfully melded: TV news as a commodity to be ‘sold’ in the ‘free market’ to ‘ensure dominance through competition’ (which generally assumes a socio-political flat earth, all OK) vs. being controlled and beholden to the PTB.

(see lysias at 16, Tom Murphy, and several others .. )

Now ‘ooopsie’ is supreme.. all aginst’ Trump…but that is calculating and duplicitous as well.

... if I have ventured into this topic it is because it is of prime importance. Everyone is relying on MSM reporting. The narrative is pre-crunched, molded, etc. And that represents the power of the MSM.

Posted by: Noirette | Feb 14, 2017 12:45:19 PM | 142


Thats what you are missing. Flynn wasnt hated because his policy on Iran he was hated because hes view on russia.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 12:48:47 PM | 143

If 95% of the media were against Trump, ...

ALL but one U.S. newspaper editorial board endorsed Clinton for president.

That was unprecedented.

Posted by: b | Feb 14, 2017 12:58:26 PM | 144

According to Flynn's resignation letter - linked to above by b - Gen. Flynn shot off his own foot by trying to cover up a minor stumble by lying about it. Trump just lost confidence in him. You're fired! Secondly, the transcripts were obviously leaked to the MSM by bureaucratic rivals inside the White House. It would be interesting to see what Trump does about that. If he can't eliminate leaking by his own team (staff, cabinet officers, congress and the bureaucracy) then he's finished before he even started.

Posted by: rackstraw | Feb 14, 2017 12:59:30 PM | 145

@5 + @32Jen

Well spoken jen. Though I think most of us are aware that the media circus surrounding trump is hysterical. Though it has seemed to me that it's winding down to some extent, no more crazy claims of him being a Russian agent or that kind of thing. It's not going away obviously but I feel in the current media climate it should be no surprise the dem media is still at it.

Is this really relevant to anything though? That's where I get a little dismayed when I see another one of these opeds. I think, regardless of how each of us feel about trump, we 100% get that the coverage is unfair.

Why not talk about policy decisions of Trump or something more tangible? Perhaps his exectuvie orders or how his travel ban was challenged? Just pulling those topics out of my ass but at least it's something that can be evaluated and put into a worldly context.

Yeah the media is unfair to Trump, but I think even the most rabid democrat voter still head over heels for Hillary understands that. Just seems like we're going over the same terrority we have for months at this point. Beating a dead horse really.

Though I must say it's entertaining to hear the dem media machine trying to attack trump without bringing up their past follies. Hard to criticise Trump for killing a 8yo Yemeni girl when Obama killed her 16yo brother and Bush killed their father. Life is stranger than fiction I swear.

On the other hand, it's nice to actually see Americans paying attention to policy decisions of any kind for once. I swear it stuns me how someone can vote for a politician w.o having a clue what their voting record in congress (for example) was like. Trump and Hillary would probably both have been bad in record setting ways. At least in this case people have their eyes glued to the capital and are not simply cheering on something they don't really care to even understand. People are passionate in their dissent now, which I feel is important, and while it may be often misdirected and harnessed by political elites with an agenda, at least Americans are becoming aware that their country is very sick.

Though the hate for Trump coming from the media is largely unjustified, he and his team ARE doing very very scary things and using rhetoric that is equally frightening in my eyes. Perhaps the media might be helping some unintentionally by just making them more aware of politics and the need for dissent in a quote unquote democracy. If people begin to open their eyes to the bipartisan evils unleashed everyday and saw the undeniable continuities in policy between each American President, regardless of so called party affiliation, than that would be a start. People are starting to wake up as the media makes fools of themselves.

Just my 2c. I think showing continuity between trump and his predecessors would really stick in some people's minds. Back in the early 90s the CIA and WH still had the popular saying "real men go to Tehran." Times may change but things stay the same.

OffTopic: International law says the use OR THREAT of aggression (ie. Warfare) is the biggest crime of all (Nuremberg). The threat is just as bad as the use of force in the text. So when Trump (along with Obama and Bush and Clinton and yadda yadda) say things like:

'all options are on the table' or
'we're putting [Insert MENA country here] officially on notice"

Is that a warcrime? I wish people would consider how much weight these phrases hold when we just brush them aside. Even people who are desperate to not see another MENA warathon seem to miss how powerful words like that are. Nuremberg laws lack a lot in my eyes but it's still funny most politicians are absolutely in the dark about them (or that our country is bound to them). Maybe its a joke to even mention international law nowadays. Its the law of "who has the biggest guns and the most money."

Posted by: FecklessLeft | Feb 14, 2017 1:18:29 PM | 146


So what you're basically saying is that Flynn was a Neocon on Iran but not on Russia, because this just can't indicate that he was a Neocon who got compromised in some way by Russia to help Russia get out of the Empire's crosshairs.

Flynn was a Neocon when it came to Syria as well. He argued with Obama because Flynn wanted to arm the Syrian opposition early on; he wanted a Libya outcome; ergo he's a Neocon.

Flynn was a disgruntled and reckless ex-high U.S. official who later mingled with the Russians out of spite for being forced to resign in Obama's administration, and came back from the Russian experience--compromised. That's all; it's that simple. He was a Neocon; and then he was compromised on the issue of Russia. There's no more to see here.

You think that if a disgruntled dismissed high-placed official of the Russian government, who was angry with Putin, and joining the U.S. media to trash Putin and socializing with the U.S. President and government officials - you think the U.S. wouldn't try to compromise, buy or bribe this individual to use for their benefit against Russia??? So what makes Putin's strategy different? I don't blame Putin for playing every card he can to protect Russia. Flynn falls into his lap and Putin's not going to take advantage of the opportunity to compromise, buy or bribe him, to benefit Russia, especially when he saw how easily Flynn went from wanting Erdogan toppled to doing business with him and mysteriously changing his tune on Erdogan? Flynn was easy pickings for Putin. See my comment @99, it's more specific on Flynn's business in Turkey. Putin put those pieces on Flynn together and figured: Flynn is easy to compromise, he's got a chip, he's reckless and easily influenced, as in the case of Erdogan, he's here in Russia, and we're going to turn Flynn; so he'll protect Russia when he returns to the U.S. government.

That's all Flynn is: a Neocon on everything except Russia because he was compromised. Period! Nothing more to see.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 1:21:19 PM | 147

Sorry, my reply was meant for @144 Anonymous.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 14, 2017 1:30:23 PM | 148

Posted by: b | Feb 14, 2017 12:58:26 PM | 145

ALL but five U.S. newspaper editorial board endorsed Clinton for president.
Trump: 1
Johnson: 3
Not Trump: 1
(from your link)

Posted by: From The Hague | Feb 14, 2017 1:46:46 PM | 149


Sorry I misspoke. I meant to say the positions vis-a-vis Russia and Iran are irreconcilable, not irrevocable. In this I think Circe is correct, though my reading would not be that Russia found Flynn an easy mark, but that the rampaging anti-Trumpists did. The Russians would have become wary, especially after the US/UN rep's speech wasn't walked back by Trump. I have just felt that we were on the high road to war with Iran, and if Flynn's resignation would slow that disaster or deflect it that is the most important issue. Russia has survived these crazy attacks so far and become more popular even in this country in doing so. And it is totally silly for Trump to be talking about returning Crimea to Ukraine; that was Crimea's decision to resist the crazies there in the first place.

The neocons are not going to win this. If the dark readings of the tea leaves are correct, it is going to be a plague on both your houses, not victory for the one out of power. It will be a terrible time for all in the US, but maybe the world will be safer, and they can repair the damage this country has inflicted upon them as we will be too busy just trying to survive.

It's hugely saddening just to reflect upon what could have been when Obama first came into office. Even then, though many did not realize it, we were given no choice at all by the parties in power. We knew that this time, however, and we won't be fooled. Benjamin Franklin was wrong; it wasn't the people that failed, it was their representatives.

Posted by: juliania | Feb 14, 2017 3:20:14 PM | 150

#135 Circe

The whole system is gonna come down crashing with Trump?


And WHAT IS gonna make it come down crashing?

The rambling, deluded old leftie partisans like yourself??

If you and another 1,000 of youz had a proper 3-dozen men, well armed, bloodthirsty blackshirts quickly coming jogging way with long knives and a dark fascist grin saying "lets drain some bolshevik today!" you'd run off crying to your mommies.

Even the Berkley Anarchists would flee like whipped dogs if they encountered a proper machette wielding rightist mob looking to lynch some young communist arse.

Face it, you are a bunch of worthless p***sies, and you won't bring anything down but your own families maybe, if you ever get on their radar.

And the best part is - those well armed, psychopath fastist will be the very bottom rung, the arse end of the arse end of the dark side. They will be the dumbest, most patriotic idiots still thinking that CIA is the good Ole American Guyz. Even the obvious Kibuttzniks among them.

Alternatively, they might send you all to FEMA camp. A nice, big government organisation. Very Keynesian, I hear. Much cleaner death camps. Die quickly and have the remains disposed of in a highly sanitary, scientific manner.

I am not fooling myself. I know i dont shoot well enough - yet. And no, a grandson of an Int'l bdes veteran from the Ebro, I won't be shooting at you leftties. I just regret I can't count any of you losers for potential co-combattants. You are to crazy and militarily useless. And a bunch of p***ies to boot.

Posted by: Quadriad | Feb 14, 2017 3:45:31 PM | 151

@Quadraid, 152

While I generally agree with your assessment, I have to make some clarification on that:

If you and another 1,000 of youz had a proper 3-dozen men, well armed, bloodthirsty blackshirts quickly coming jogging way with long knives and a dark fascist grin saying "lets drain some bolshevik today!"

I wouldn't use the words "Bolsheviks" lightly when referring to this neo-liberal cabal of cultural and sexual fringes (including those anarchist and BLM types) of today. You don't have to agree with Bolsheviks but real Bolsheviks, the ones who won Russia's Civil War of 1918-1922 (which dwarfs US Civil War by the order of magnitude) were, actually, one of the toughest sons of bitches one could ever see. And, these were so called Bolsheviks (VKP(b) took the lead in sacrifice--"Communists--forward", a slogan) who also ground Wehrmacht at the peak of its might into the bloody mess. So, get your definitions straight--US media and "historiography" are not the best sources for that. But I agree with you, angry white and well armed males, especially with military backgrounds, if, God forbids, things will get hot would walk over the categories of public you described.

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Feb 14, 2017 4:22:13 PM | 152

- Flynn is being investigated by the FBI ? Is this an extra stab in the back by the Deep State ??

Posted by: Willy2 | Feb 14, 2017 4:27:09 PM | 153


Its not his team, its people in the cia/fbi that leak this stuff.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 14, 2017 5:01:29 PM | 154

Willy2 @ 154

Flynn is being investigated by the FBI ? Is this an extra stab in the back by the Deep State ??

The FBI vetted him before his Senate confirmation. Flynn with held this information from the FBI. This is a federal crime. Reporting also says Flynn had told Trump about this 2 weeks ago, apparently Donald didn't see fit to tell his security staff.

Can't imagine why you're blaming the "deep state". Better to have DT's foibles caught early on, rather then key people not talking to each other in a critical situation that could cause serious damage.

Posted by: jdmckay | Feb 14, 2017 6:48:52 PM | 155

Flynn's post of National Security Adviser does not require Senate confirmation, so he was never confirmed by the Senate.

Posted by: lysias | Feb 14, 2017 6:54:09 PM | 156

Anyone care to unpack this glob of pig manure some troll posted on youtube?

davidrbecken2 hours ago
Flynn is not the whole story - Follow the oil money to TREASON:This is
what Trump and Putin are up to: Exxon Mobil, under Rex Tillerson,
brokered a deal with Russia in 2013 for 60 million acres of Russian land
to pump oil out of, but all that Russian oil went through pipelines in
the Ukraine, who heavily taxed the proceeds, and were applying for
admission into NATO at the time.Putin subsequently invaded Ukraine
in 2014, secured the routes to export the oil tax-free by sea, and took
control of the port where their Black Sea Naval Fleet is based, by
taking the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine by force and not giving it
back. This was Hitler-tier imperialism that broke every international
law in the free world.After Obama sanctioned Russia for the invasion,
they could only pump oil from approximately 3 of those 60 million acres.
But now Rex Tillerson is our Secretary of State, and as of today,
there’s information circulating that Donald Trump will likely
unilaterally remove all sanctions against Russia in the coming days or
weeks.Putin will make half a trillion (500 Billion) dollars from that
much untapped oil. All pumped tax-free through Crimea, stolen from
Ukraine, now owned by Russia. Putin may have subverted our government
just to become the richest man in the world. **According to leaked docs
Trump will get 19% cut (Rosneft stock placed in Cayman accounts in

I thought it was only gas that went through Ukraine, but Russian crude? Leaked docs? Creative trolls?

Posted by: stumpy | Feb 14, 2017 10:52:47 PM | 157

I thought it was only gas that went through Ukraine, but Russian crude? Leaked docs? Creative trolls?

Anyone care to unpack this glob of pig manure some troll posted on youtube?

Posted by: stumpy | Feb 14, 2017 10:52:47 PM | 158

And why should we do that? For the sheer olfactory pleasure? I would rather dabble in horse manure than in pig manure, but what you pasted is a pile if HUMAN feces, and they are really the worst.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 15, 2017 9:32:15 AM | 158

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.