Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 11, 2019

Trump Brings Troops Back Home To Saudi Arabia

Monday: Want to bring back US forces engaged in endless wars: Trump

"We want to bring our troops back home. It''s been many many years. It''s been decades, in many cases. We want to bring our troops back home. I got elected on that. If you go back and look at our speeches, I would say we want to bring our troops back home from these endless wars," Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday.

Friday:

Lucas Tomlinson @LucasFoxNews - 17:50 UTC · Oct 11, 2019
Pentagon: Since May, U.S. forces have increased in Middle East by ~14,000: statement. There are currently more than 60,000 U.S. troops deployed to various countries and aboard warships.
---
Dan Lamothe @DanLamothe - 17:50 UTC · Oct 11, 2019
Pentagon just announced the deployment of two more fighter squadrons, one air expeditionary wing, two Patriot batteries and one THAAD unit to Saudi Arabia just now, moments before briefing with senior officials.

None of which is able to defend Saudi Arabia against another drone or cruise-missile attack.

The troop should be reminded that deployments in Saudi Arabia can end in unfriendly ways.


bigger

Posted by b on October 11, 2019 at 16:10 UTC | Permalink

Comments
next page »

bring the troops home to ksa is more like it... either trump is talking one way and doing another, or he doesn't have control over what the us military does... it looks like the later, but it could be the former too... it is true the gear usa sells ksa doesn't work.. i don't know how they are going to go around that... mbs wanted trump and iran to talk with one another! but as carriers of the freedom torch - the usa isn't allowed to talk to iran, lol... it isn't about talk anyway.. it is about actions... actions speak much louder then talk and is where folks are not deceived..

Posted by: james | Oct 11 2019 16:23 utc | 1

A sales person / flim clan man / snake oil merchant / conman allows the punter to imagine what it is they are buying and doesn't disabuse them of their illusions.

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 11 2019 16:28 utc | 2

Saudis getting threatened by the same mobsters that they paid their massive protection monies to...What a great deal right there! Anyone still wants to be a US "ally"? (Poland raises hand)

Posted by: JW | Oct 11 2019 16:32 utc | 3

It is in the nature of the beast to pay lip service to the commander in Chief when its interests are at stake.

No war means no perks, no cozy financial cocoons and this is just not palatable to the
Pentagon bosses and the MIC.

President asks for something and his orders are not followed or executed.
This is mutiny, pure and simple. The US will not withdraw from the occupied territories
on its own will but only Saigon style.

POTUS will lose his boots if he tries to bring its troops home.

When Trump becomes aware of the utter disregard for his orders, he will have to resign, unless he sacks senior personnel and brings more Colonels and Majors to the forefront.

Go away with the Generals and replace them with less tainted officers.

Of course this is a high risk business.

Posted by: CarlD | Oct 11 2019 16:37 utc | 4

Here is an article that looks at the sources of Saudi Arabia's weapons and how much the Saudi royal family spends on its military:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2019/09/saudi-arabia-military-expenditures-and.html

One has to wonder how the sales of American arms has affected the balance of power in the Middle East, particularly when these arms are being sold to a nation with a poor human rights record.

Posted by: Sally Snyder | Oct 11 2019 16:42 utc | 5

Thanks for the posting b

I just posted a comment about the latest increase in troops to SA in the Syria thread and then found your most recent article expanding on that theme.

Trump is a TV personality hired to be a front for the cult that owns and operates global private finance. That cult has added $168 billion of debt to the Fed's balance sheet in the past 3 weeks and the market is up 3-4 hundred today because propaganda works with those of faith. In 2008 the Fed's balance sheet was compromised AFTER the crash but this time they are getting a head start to socialize the losses before the crash.

When will the suffering at the bottom cause changes to the structure of our social contract that I keep pushing for?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 11 2019 16:50 utc | 6

Wasn't the presence of USA troops stationed on the sacred ground of Saudi Arabia one of Osama bin Laden's major beefs with the USA? Didn't George W. Bush remove them not that long after 9/11? Don't remember the actual date; it was very quiet and discrete and the MSM barely made any peep about it. We don't negotiated with terrorists indeed, not much! Of course, that wasn't negotiating, it was just doing what they wanted. The troops shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Posted by: Prairie Bear | Oct 11 2019 16:51 utc | 7

"None of which is able to defend Saudi Arabia against another drone or cruise-missile attack."

Well, yes and no. For now these forces don't have the ability to intercept the kind of slow and low-flying cheap drones that recently hit the Saudi Oil facility. But they do have the ability to stomp hard on anyone launching them. Sometimes defense is offensive deterrence. Although that depends on our forces having some sort of clue as to what they are doing, which is currently a dangerous assumption...

Pity that the United States military does not have the mission of actually defending our country from the ongoing invasion over the southern border. Anyone else find it funny, that we can blow up countries on the other side of the world for no apparent good reason, we can commit to defending the borders of hostile extremist totalitarian foreign states, but the ONLY thing the US military is absolutely forbidden to do, is to defend the actual borders of the United States? Yes I know it's racist to think this way, you'll have to forgive me, I'm off my meds.

Posted by: TG | Oct 11 2019 16:53 utc | 8

Trump's double-talk and media complicity have caused many in US to beleive that Trump has pulled out troops in Syria instead of simply pulling back from the border.

When the propaganda is this blatent, one must wonders if we're being set-up for something very unpleasant.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 16:54 utc | 9

@ psychohistorian # 6

"When will the suffering at the bottom cause changes to the structure of our social contract that I keep pushing for?

Perhaps, when they hit rock bottom like the Ecuadorians?

Posted by: aye, myself & me | Oct 11 2019 17:11 utc | 10

I think maybe there was some chagrin about the fact that U.S. supplied defense systems had not proven very effective.
Meanwhile the order is still open.
Just business.

Posted by: JARED | Oct 11 2019 17:12 utc | 11

The real pity is that First Nations people in the Americas did not immediately kill every last stinking disease-ridden European as soon as they set foot on shore about 500 years ago.

Posted by: Trailer Trash | Oct 11 2019 17:20 utc | 12

Carl D @4

I agree with you. This is why the never ending attacks on Trump. I think he really thought that a President ran things and I do think he would like to stop all the massive expenses of foreign adventurism. Slippery folks like Hillary and the rest kind of understand who pulls the strings but not Trump.
This is not to say that I think he is a great statesman or anything. I think he sees things fairly simply and does want to MAGA or at least fit the picture he has in his head of seeing the "USA in your Chevrolet" come true.

Posted by: arby | Oct 11 2019 17:23 utc | 13

CarlD @4: This is mutiny, pure and simple.

Oh please, Trump is in on it. He's a willing front man just like Obama.

You can tell by the way he bullshits in the quote that b provided; talking about what he campaigned on instead of what he's doing now (sending MORE troops to ME).

The media has then colored Trump's flimsy intentions into the message that "Trump is pulling out" and amplified it.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

President Bonespurs is "locked and loaded" and his small hands will gleefully pull the trigger when he's ordered to do so.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 17:28 utc | 14

Yet another move in the great domestic confliction within the Outlaw US Empire between Trump's Isolationistic Nationalism and those still trying to fulfill the already failed quest by the Outlaw US Empire to attain Full Spectrum Dominance--an ongoing conflict now over 100 years old: For its roots, review the battle between the advocates of Wilsonian Internationalist Democracy and Unilateral Nationalist/America First Imperialism from 1914-1921. Promoters of the latter won the first round, then lost to those who highjacked FDR's Internationalism to pursue their perverted vision of imposing Wilsonian Democracy universally by force. Trump's historic tweets declare the utter failure of the latter's attempts and the need to return to America First. IMO, since both factions promote the Moneypower's interests, it has yet to decide on which side to support which is crucial. Trump's emphasis on the wastage of so much $$ is an attempt to win the Moneypower's backing. His message is being Muted by BigLie Media because it's controlled by the other faction.

Many barflies loathe both factions, but it's a mistake to deny their existence or the battle being waged between them. Then there's the third faction--the rising of the Public in a manner that goes against both factions and seeks to have its own interests win. These battle lines ought to becoming clear; my comment aims at dispersing the fog.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 17:32 utc | 15

"we want to bring our troops back home from these endless wars"

Trump said bring them home from the wars, not just bring them home. A recent example is Syria, where US troops were moved away from a potential conflict area to a place where they are relatively harmless.

In fact, having troops forward deployed in places of "increased tension" (a currently popular phrase) actually retards the chance of war, if not eliminates it, in that particular area.

Current examples of where this is true are the US versus North Korea and Iran. Korea hasn't mentioned it much, but Iran has explicitly stated that it will take out US bases and ships in the Gulf area if attacked. The US has over 50,00 troops, plus dependents and other civilians, in the area, so that is a real threat. The USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier squadron has been sailing back and forth in the North Arabian Sea now for five months and has never entered the Gulf, perhaps with that in mind. It's a first for a carrier not enter the Gulf on deployment.

In Korea, the US has Camp Humphreys with 35,000 troops plus their families and other civilians, 60 miles south of the DMZ,and along with nearby Osan Air Base easy targets for North Korean explosive rockets. That also is a safeguard against conflict.

In other words the odds of a US aggression against Iran would be much, much higher if those troops and bases and ships weren't there, considering Iran's military capabilities.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 17:38 utc | 16

Sure was decent of centcom to evacuate its senior staff to South Carolina first (very brave of them). Maybe the realization that their senior command has abandoned them will be kept in mind by those left behind during their decision making processes.

Posted by: Josh | Oct 11 2019 17:39 utc | 17

Rather than guard permawar, a waiting for Godot banality, why not deploy the military to guard the military's own paycheck? There was after all an OPEC security provision quid pro quo implicit in the petrodollar. Secure the oroborus!

https://imgur.com/gallery/vMQMEac

Posted by: FSD | Oct 11 2019 17:46 utc | 18

Don Bacon @ 16

Persuasive point about the forward-deployed US forces (in stationary bases, at least) acting as human shields against the prospect of the US engaging in a major action with even a medium sized power able to retaliate.

US forces as human shields against Pentagon recklessness.... hopeful thought, though it would not preclude the Pearl Harbour scenario of using them to trigger the public into support for a full-scale war.

Posted by: Paul Damascene | Oct 11 2019 17:48 utc | 19

@ Josh 17
centcom to evacuate its senior staff to South Carolina

What are you talking about?

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 17:53 utc | 20

Marc A. Thiessen from the Washington Post disagrees with this blog:

Trump’s cry that America is fighting ‘endless wars’ is a canard

Posted by: vk | Oct 11 2019 17:53 utc | 21

@ PD 19
US forces as human shields against Pentagon recklessness
It's the Pentagon which put them there, perhaps for this reason, or perhaps unknowingly. In any case war is a civilian decision effected by military advice especially when it concerns casualty estimates.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 18:00 utc | 22

Unmentioned is Putin's upcoming visit to Saudi on the 14th where he's quite likely to promote Russia and Zarif's collective security/peace proposal as something required to allow for the further development of nuclear power by ROSATOM. Putin may also remark the best defense against Yemeni missiles attacking Saudi oil and other infrastructure is to cease the war rather than buying Russia air defense weapons. Putin won't need to point out the failure of other Saudi foreign adventures and the damage done to Saudi state wealth, although he might hint when discussing oil production and price--recently Russia said $50/bbl was a "fair price," while ARAMCO recently said it needed $70-80/bbl to repair and expand infrastructure. Will Putin remark on the danger to MbS of the supposedly increasing numbers of Outlaw US Empire troops given the impending failure of its oil fracking industry? The time is rapidly nearing for MbS to prove himself wise or to continue being a fool.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 18:13 utc | 23

Don Bacon @20--

The relocation of senior Centcom staff from Qatar to the US mainland that was recently announced, although this item says the move was temporary.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 18:21 utc | 24

Trump claims there are no US soldiers left in Syria which is as always a lie. He wants to fool his base into believing he is ending the US entanglement in the ME when he isn't. As for the Kurds they should have made up dirt on Biden.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/10/politics/trump-fact-check-no-soldiers-in-syria/index.html

Posted by: BraveNewWorld | Oct 11 2019 18:24 utc | 25

Jrabbit @ 14; opined;

"Oh please, Trump is in on it. He's a willing front man just like Obama."


When, does anyone think, that some of our naive posters will grab a clue, that, in fact, the above statement is absolutely true???

Posted by: ben | Oct 11 2019 18:27 utc | 26

karlof1 @15: Trump's Isolationistic Nationalism

Trump is not an isolationist. He's a con artist. The Trump Administration has:

... clearly taken sides in the Israel-Palestinian dispute (in contradiction of UN resolutions);

... joined with neocons to overthrow Maduro;

... militarized space with a new 'Space command';

... significantly increased the military budget while he also demands that allies pay more;

... deepened the new Cold War with provocative exercises and terminating treaties like INF and probably 'Open Skies';

... illegally occupied Syria and is now participating in a propaganda campaign that pretends that the Trump Administration is pulling out instead of pulling back.

... pressured Germany to use expensive US LNG instead of Russian gas.

... trampled on press freedoms, whistle-blowers, and dissenters - notably jailing Assange and Chelsea Manning; and shaming NFL athletes.


Not an exhaustive list.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Apologists say: "Trump hasn't started a war". But he appears to be on the brink of war with several countries. Is such belligerence expected from an "isolationist"?

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 18:29 utc | 27

For those who've forgotten, this tweet recaps events in the Gulf region.

ben @26--

Oh, so I'm naïve now?

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 18:30 utc | 28

Trump brings Troops Back Home To Saudi Arabia? I shouldn't think that will work. US troops in Saudi have to be kept secret, like the alliance with Israel. As long as it's not visible, it can be done. Large numbers of troops, no.

What happened after Kuwait was not an isolated case, back in the past. Introduction of large numbers of US troops will only lead to more isolation of the Saudi regime. We've just had the surrender of a large number of Saudi troops to the Houthis because they didn't want to fight.

More troops in Saudi is not an option.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 18:36 utc | 29

syria/libya/iraq/afghanistan/yemen are not wars. on the brink like where north korea? iran? mexico? Kashmir? kurds? china?

lets not get into the trump is pro war or anti war so he pisses off russia...... is he still a russian puppet as well? shall we go into that too?

Posted by: jason | Oct 11 2019 18:38 utc | 30

JR who has no grip on US History whatsoever! Those advocating what was termed by the media of the day as Isolationism never looked at the ongoing escalation of US Imperialism during the so-called period of isolationism--the period that produced Smedley Butler and War is a Racket. As I've written here before, the term Isolationism is a euphemism for Unilateralism--"No Entangling Alliances."

There's a very good reason I ignore you and donkeytale--you're two heads of the same beast, each at the ass-end of the other and unworthy of debate because you have no historical depth of knowledge.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 18:40 utc | 32

@ 28 opined;"Oh, so I'm naïve now?"


Only if you believe DJT is anything but a "front man", and a "poser" for the empire,just like the majorities in both political parties.

You have your opinions, and, I agree with many of them, but, not where DJT is concerned.

Posted by: ben | Oct 11 2019 18:49 utc | 33

I'm sorry that many can't see what is going on here, but I will be plain. Everything about potus fp up to date has been the avoidance of quagmire and especially blood sacrifice from our guys. He wants to keep looking tough but he is not a true believer and so our entanglements will keep decreasing in their intensity even though the mic will still be able to afford its lavish life. But that won't be for long.

People here don't seem to get that pulling out our troops in the Mena and afgh. In one fell swoop would look incredibly weak and pussy-like. Is is not an option and yet who could argue that the trend is not decreasing despite the pressure brought on by the neocons and humanitarian interventionists on the left i.e globalists. To argue this point is to surmise from a lack of information especially due to the fact that potus has not gotten us into any shooting wars as of yet.

He simply has to stay the course and the natural play of Russia, Iran, and co. Houthi and Syria and their gains will gradually push us out. It's a good play from potus. Don't see why many here can't grasp that.

Posted by: Nemesiscalling | Oct 11 2019 18:56 utc | 34

@ karlof1 24
The relocation of senior Centcom staff from Qatar to the US mainland that was recently announced
I have not seen any such announcement. The air command and control function at al Udeid air base, Qatar was moved to Shaw Air Force base SC, for 24 hours, is all I've seen.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 19:10 utc | 35

Withdrawing a few hundred US special forces from the frontier zone invaded by Turkey, as many have said, is not the same as withdrawing from Syria. But it is, as the 30 km zone comprises nearly all the Kurdish population. The US position will be a few posts in the desert, much like Da'ish has (Yes, I know the Jazira is not really desert, but treeless agricultural plains). That area is mainly inhabited by Sunni Arabs, some of whom are continuing to support Da'ish, and providing the Da'ish militants whose renaissance is at issue. An uncomfortable situation.

The US situation in Iraq is also dodgy. The demonstrations seem to have stopped (If they were ever a US-inspired Color Revolution), since the Baghdad government made concessions. Not surprising, as the Shi'a government, and the revolting Shi'a youth, see themselves as basically on the same side.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 19:11 utc | 36

I'm thinking the US troop presence in Arabia will only hasten the eventual liberation of Mecca. If all hell broke loose and Israel/US attacked Iran or something like that would US troops really stay and fight it out against the Houthis, Revolutionary Guards, Quds Force, PMU, Hezbollah, SAA..etc? If so, how many US deaths until the US populous has had enough? With all those troops in the vicinity it wouldn't be more than a couple months until 1000s were killed. Also what armies would be fighting with the US side? The Jihadis in Syria will be all but eliminated in the coming months, and we see the Saudi Army is mostly just a bunch of untrained desperate mercenaries from Africa. So who would be the proxy forces? UAE can't muster much. It would just be what's left of the Saudi military, IDF and perhaps some Sunni extremists left over from the ranks ISIS/HTS. I can't see Turkey coming to the aid of Saudi/Israel/US. What a bad place to put the US military in.

Posted by: Jason | Oct 11 2019 19:16 utc | 37

nobody listens to POTUS. the head of the Executive is a hollow voice all over the state bureaucracy: exemplary democracy, and supposedly, presidential at that!

Posted by: nietzsche1510 | Oct 11 2019 19:17 utc | 38

karlof1 @15

Does your comment clear the fog? It seems to me that you are saying that Trump is on the good side and really wants to end the wars and bring the troops home! But does he? Isn't this the same dispute that has been on-going since Trump's election.

I don't believe that Trump is as you appear to believe. For one thing he appoints people that are at complete odds with ending wars and the only person he appointed that had any credibility was Michael Flynn and Trump dropped him faster than a ferret up a trouser leg! And more recently, there was a lot of hope that Trump would appoint Ron Paul to replace John Bolton - an obvious choice if Trump was really interested in ending wars. So did Trump appoint Ron Paul? Did he f**k!

It is fairly obvious that the US is heading towards another Trump vs Clinton election - an absolute farce!

Americans should be thinking of writing in Ron Paul's name in the 2020 Presidential Election.

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 11 2019 19:21 utc | 39

TG @ 8:

Is it not likely that one reason the US keeps its southern borders open is that it needs more cannon fodder in its army? Where else would the US find more innocent and naive recruits if its own young people are increasingly unfit to serve in the military because of health issues such as obesity and substance addictions?

Posted by: Jen | Oct 11 2019 19:23 utc | 40

US troops in US units engaged in conducting and supporting ground combat:
Bush - Iraq - 130,000 max
Obama - Afghanistan - 100,000 max
Trump - 0

Plus there are ground train, advise and assist troops in seven countries (that we know of): Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger, a continuation of previous engagements, also troops stationed at various bases throughout the world especially in Europe (Germany etc) and East Asia (Korea and Japan).

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 19:27 utc | 41

Uh oh, NATO bombing NATO? Technically, friendly fire? To whose aide do UK, Germany and France come in the event of an Article 5? Or can they work out a time-share with Turkey getting blue weekends? The world is getting more complicated at lightning speed. Rumor has it that Mars is itching to take sides. For its part Turkey says, 'we're sorry Uncle Sam, may we kiss your boo-boo?'

By NATO standards does this mean global-civil war? This whole globalism thing is feeling more like the collapsing walls on a too-small planet. WWW3 will be a PoMo-collage of gaping internal contradictions. Everybody has orders to shoot everyone else. No prisoners!

https://www.newsweek.com/us-troops-syria-turkey-1464727

Posted by: FSD | Oct 11 2019 19:33 utc | 42

Is it not likely that one reason the US keeps its southern borders open is that it needs more cannon fodder in its army? Where else would the US find more innocent and naive recruits if its own young people are increasingly unfit to serve in the military because of health issues such as obesity and substance addictions?

Posted by: Jen | Oct 11 2019 19:23 utc | 38

Perhaps our US contributors can tell us how recruitment to the US military is going. In Britain it's failing, as no-one wants to fight. Recruitment of foreign poor, but wild and brave, is standard practice for armies throughout history.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 19:36 utc | 43

Ben @ 32 said

"Only if you believe DJT is anything but a "front man", and a "poser" for the empire,just like the majorities in both political parties."

Why has he been hounded since before his ascendancy to the throne even by his own party. And it has been relentless.

I do agree that he appoints questionable people.

Posted by: arby | Oct 11 2019 19:41 utc | 44

@37

elections are just part of manufacturing consent, there are no good options because there aren’t really any options

Posted by: Timmy | Oct 11 2019 19:43 utc | 45

@ Laguerre 41
Recruitment continues to be difficult in the US, now being aided by monetary inducements including large bonuses for certain specialties and student loan forgiveness. They also use computer war games sponsorships. Recruitment has been typically higher in certain "markets" like the South; the Pentagon is now trying to target different demographics. e.g. in cities. They continue their programs to get-em while they're young and stupid, teens and even younger.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 19:48 utc | 46

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 19:48 utc | 44

Are they arriving at replacement level? In Britain they aren't.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 19:52 utc | 47

Laguerre - Here in Koreatown in Los Angeles, the army recruiters have fliers taped to the lamp posts offering their help with career guidance. There is a marines recruiting office and an army recruiting office two blocks away from one another at Western and Wilshire. Sunbleached posters of heroic young men and women with impressive arrays of weapons in the background adorn their windows. One cannot see in, so I can't tell how much traffic they get when I walk past.
Jen, I always find your take on things to be spot on. Indeed, the foreign legion is a way in to this place. And maybe they'll get a free trip to Saudi Arabia!
AKDC - you nailed it with the grifter analogy. A little three card monte for the rubes. Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.

Posted by: roza shanina | Oct 11 2019 20:01 utc | 48

ben @26

The statement is not true. The naive are those who get caught up in the tsukkomi side of the silly manzai troll act that plays out here every day (the mule is the boke side of that act).

While it is true that the two corporate parties in the US manufacture disagreement for theatrical effect, this deliberate artificial conflict in US politics is always structured to further imperial/big business interests.

The problem with trying to claim that the conflict between Trump and the Deep State is just an extension of this mock fight between the Republicans and the Democrats is that the political pro-wrestling matches are intended to obscure the Deep State with a media smoke screen, not bring the Deep State out into open public battle. This conflict is doing significant damage to the establishment and the empire is reaping little to no benefit from it. To claim that this is intentional is to suggest that the establishment is masochistically injuring itself for no gain. We little people are not supposed to even know about the Deep State. We are supposed to fixate of the fake partisan squabbling instead. More importantly, America's military adventures to maintain empire are supposed to be viewed as a natural state of being. The public is not supposed to ever hear the possibility that those military adventures could be curtailed, and certainly not from the President.

Look at all of the supposed benefits that the manzai act tries to claim that Trump has brought to the empire. There is nothing they claim that Trump has done for the establishment that Clinton couldn't have done more of and with far less exposure (and thus less damage) to the establishment.

Finally, if Trump was in on the scam, would the scammers have had to lie to him about the Skripal ducks? What does the establishment gain from drawing attention back to the empire's illegal activities involving Biden in Ukraine?

The convoluted nonsense necessary to make all of the empire's screw-ups over the last several years seem like some kind of mind bendingly complicated master plan is just plain silly. This isn't to say that Trump is some kind of Hero of the People or anything like that, but it does mean that Trump represents a fracture in the empire's ruling class and ongoing infighting in the establishment.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 11 2019 20:01 utc | 49

"Recruitment has been typically higher in certain "markets" like the South; the Pentagon is now trying to target different demographics. e.g. in cities."

This is self-indulged interwar footsie. Faced with real war, market ministrations will give way to mandatory draft and enforced weight reduction programs.

Posted by: FSD | Oct 11 2019 20:04 utc | 50

Here in Koreatown in Los Angeles, the army recruiters have fliers taped to the lamp posts offering their help with career guidance.

Posted by: roza shanina | Oct 11 2019 20:01 utc | 46

So there's a problem then.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 20:09 utc | 51

@ Laguerre 45
Are they arriving at replacement level? In Britain they aren't.
Last time I looked they were barely getting by. Who trusts their reports?
They can bring in bonus payments at any time. And standards: They say that they don't lower the standards, but they waive them. Prior conviction? Never mind. They've loosened rules on tattoos, etc.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 20:18 utc | 52

karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 18:30 utc | 28

Thanks for linking to that tweet.

Posted by: spudskiw | Oct 11 2019 20:19 utc | 53

>Perhaps our US contributors can tell us how recruitment
>to the US military is going.
>Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 19:36 utc | 41

They have been struggling for years to meet recruitment targets. That's why they have to sponsor NASCAR races, fly-overs for football games, etc. They send recruiters into schools to trade recruitment contracts for college tuition money, and hand out video games to the kids not quite old enough to sign up as a child soldier.

The military culture and war-worship seeps into every public event, parade, and holiday. There are more military and police themed TV programs and movies than I can shake a stick at. Apparently they are popular. Personally, they make me ill. And still, they have trouble making the numbers.

As someone above mentioned, potential recruits that are physically fit are hard to find. The grunts these days are carrying inhuman weight loads in unbearable conditions so they can kill other poor people then come home to poor treatment, both medical and social. That's not so appealing any more.

Military recruitment tends to run in families and that can work against the recruiters. People remember how Shrub Bush called up all those weekend-warrior national guardsmen who expected to only be activated for natural disasters and riot suppression. Uncles and grandfathers talk about having their contracts unilaterally extended while their family were living in awful base housing or being tossed out of their homes during the last big financial panic. Military kids see how their parents have been treated poorly, over and over. Even the most fervently patriotic citizens start to notice, eventually.

Uncle Sam is in no position to start a major war anywhere. Its forces are spread too thin. Dear Leaders would have to re-start the draft, the most barbaric form of slavery yet invented by "civilization". Would people show up for induction? I don't know. Uncle Sam's peons are rather passive, inclined to obey orders, and to do nothing until someone gives them an order.

Posted by: Trailer Trash | Oct 11 2019 20:23 utc | 54

If I were Assad, I would quietly tell the Kurds that if they wanted any kind of deal in the future they would have to actively rid the Syrian nation of the Western beast. I would like to see the US forces chased out of Syria.

Posted by: imoverit | Oct 11 2019 20:24 utc | 55

@ William Gruff who wrote
"
The convoluted nonsense necessary to make all of the empire's screw-ups over the last several years seem like some kind of mind bendingly complicated master plan is just plain silly. This isn't to say that Trump is some kind of Hero of the People or anything like that, but it does mean that Trump represents a fracture in the empire's ruling class and ongoing infighting in the establishment.
"

IMO, Trump represents the top of the 1% and they do have a plan to throw all/most of the aspiring 1% under the bus with America, if they can get away with it......that is retain global private finance with China or ??? as the new face of empire.

I do hope they fail but they seem to have most MoA barflies glazed over from what I read. How many barflies support my contention that we have a structural problem of private versus public finance civilization war going on?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 11 2019 20:45 utc | 56

@ Laguerre
There's also been a huge movement in the US, aided by the MSM politicians etc, to venerate veterans. Vets now have lower admission charges, special vehicle license plates in some states, and regular "thank you for your service" remarks. At some functions: all veterans please stand, thank you for your service etc etc. We wouldn't be able to have this ________(fill in the blank, bluegrass festival, etc) without your service . . .You've kept us free. . . .They pile it high and deep.. . . . Also many benefits for active duty who don't wear class A uniforms in public any more, they wear their slovenly cammies and boots everywhere, even the generals do in the Pentagon and everywhere. .We're at war! So civilians wear cammies too, even women . .This "warrior worship" is bound to affect recruitment of impressionable youngsters.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 20:50 utc | 57

@ Laguerre
National guard was mentioned up-thread - - many NG units (ground and air) have been called up for active service overseas, a sign of recruitment problems.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 20:54 utc | 58

What about impeachment of Trump, when you`re starting?

Posted by: Publish Ukraine | Oct 11 2019 20:57 utc | 59

It seems, again, that most commentators have lost sight of the forest for the trees.
US troops in Saudi Arabia is actually positive. It means the Saudi illusion of military self-sustenance is completely broken.
Let's not forget: neither Iran nor the Houthis were ever going to invade Saudi Arabia for any length of time.
The presence of US troops underscores MBS' failures at home and abroad. Not that his brothers/cousins are necessarily better, but the unilateralism which underlay MBS' actions (Qatar blockade, Libya, Syria, Egypt, ISIS, Yemen, likely much more) will hopefully be broken.
Don't forget: Bin Laden was mad not just at the US, but at his own Saudi countrymen for "betraying" Wahhabist Islam in cooperating with infidels. How easy will it be to export young takfiri Saudis, when there are thousands more US troops right at home?

Posted by: c1ue | Oct 11 2019 21:17 utc | 60

karlof1 @31: [I use isolationism as] ... a euphemism for Unilateralism--"No Entangling Alliances."

USA is now an Empire. USA has "entangling alliances" with 5-eyes, Israel, NATO, Gulf Monarchies, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and more.

Your grasp of history may be better than your grasp of the current reality.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 21:22 utc | 61

c1ue @58:

How easy will it be to export young takfiri Saudis, when there are thousands more US troops right at home?

Actually, it'll be very easy 'cause their leaders/handlers prioritize other goals over fighting Americans (like fighting Shia and securing cash-producing assets like oil and poppy fields).

But there may be some al Queda remnants that are offended.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 21:29 utc | 62

US troops in Saudi Arabia is actually positive. It means the Saudi illusion of military self-sustenance is completely broken.

The Saudi regime is dependent on US aid is what you mean.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 21:31 utc | 63

Don Bacon @55: "warrior worship"

An important point.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 21:31 utc | 64

It's a tautology that the POTUS must kowtow to Pentagon-MIC-NSA-CIA, or, like Trump 45, they will be ousted in a very public, very illegal, very Alice-in-Wonderlandish Palace Coup. Looking back to 1930s, every POTUS who stood in the way of Pentagon-MIC-NSA-CIA was sacked or assassinated or simply quit, whereas every POTUS who started another war received a second term, without exception.

But there is no greater, no more egregious, more mind-sickening tautology than the inconvenient truth of Gore's Great Leap Backward. Here is a filthy rich former gov pol, who created a Carbon Tax and Credit Scheme with the Bankster Elite, selling dispensations to Corporate to continue to laissez le bon temps pollute, and in return for those $100Bs in baaksheesh, Gore pays 3W tinpot dictators and their generals to slash and burn the last of Earth's rainforests for Corporate 'biofuels' plantations "carbon credits', on three continents. There are 100,000s of displaced 'climate refugees' fleeing Gore's BULLDOZERS, while Princess Gerta sails around the world, terrorizing our children, as do the Public Education Establishment and the Social Justice Warrior Brigades, with relentless brainwashing.

"Black is White, Red is Blue, War is Peace, We're Not Done With You." M☭GA!

Posted by: Jack Martin | Oct 11 2019 21:43 utc | 65

This "warrior worship" is bound to affect recruitment of impressionable youngsters.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 20:50 utc | 55

Ah yes, but is it working? Are the impressionable youngsters still willing to sign up for Trump's wars, even if he is not launching them, and even if there are considerable financial advantages, if you survive them. Funny that there's not a lot of enthusiasm. I sympathise with them.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 11 2019 21:49 utc | 66

The media, the swamp and democrat-globalists really want Donald Trump gone. They don’t want to wait for the election or risk four more years. But they can’t admit to the untenable hell holes that they’ve created overseas. Saudi oil production is clearly vulnerable to Houthi missile and UAV attack. The next one or the ones afterwards will end Saudi petroleum production and crash the global economy. No doubt there is a crash program to adapt the naval close-in weapon system to the desert but due to persuasive American corruption and outsourcing, this is unlikely to be successful in the near term, if ever. The only defense that Israel, Saudi Arabia and the USA have left is Mutually Assured Destruction. The irony is that this is contrary to the swamp’s neo-con ideology. Not to mention, bombing the Houthi has been spectacularly unsuccessful and there are no proxy forces able to defeat them. Also, it appears that Hezbollah and Iraqi Shiite militia coordinate with the Houthis. Bombing Shiite militias in Iraq will topple the current government that is already under stress from riots. American troops there and in Syria without allies will be lucky to get out alive with chaos gripping the Empire in both Washington DC and London.

The only way out is peace.

Posted by: VietnamVet | Oct 11 2019 21:54 utc | 67

"air expeditionary wing"... the euphemism for a plain unit, expect that the US dare not give its units in "allied" middle-east theocracies their true name
"It was decided that U.S. Central Command Air Forces (CENTAF) would not consist of permanently assigned units,[1] partially because of the sensitivities of Arab host states to acknowledging that U.S. forces were deployed in their countries. This made establishment of permanent units more difficult, because base access might be changed or denied with shifting, volatile, political currents. For example, during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Jordanian government denied U.S. troops were stationed in Jordan. This created a lot of concern with Jordanian military personnel stationed at Shahid Muafaq Al-Salti Air Base during the initial stages. As they were being told on television and radio that there were no U.S. troops on Jordanian soil, USAF C-17 aircraft were arriving on a daily basis with personnel and supplies. The 410th Air Expeditionary Wing was quickly growing in size. Out of confusion, Jordanian Security Forces documented everything leaving the aircraft. U.S. personnel removed labels and explosive decals from the containers, as not to aggravate the situation. American troops initially were not allowed to carry weapons in plain sight. So they carried their Beretta 9mm handguns hidden in their waistbands for protection and hid their M-4 carbines from view in their vehicles.
To minimize the risk of these kind of situations happening, the decision was taken to avoid the creation of permanent units, especially in the Middle East."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Air_Expeditionary_units_of_the_United_States_Air_Force

Posted by: fx | Oct 11 2019 21:57 utc | 68

follow up @59

USA was always careful to remain on the top of the Empire food chain so I don't think the question of isolationism/unilateralism vs Full Spectrum Dominance/globalism makes much sense.

The wheels came off in 2013 and 2014 when Russia acted to protect its interests in Syria and Ukraine. Suddenly USA realized that the Russia-Chinese alliance was a real threat so policy needed to change from a friendly-faced, cerebral and inclusive President (Obama) to a strong-arm, hot headed nationalist (Trump). In August 2014 Kissinger wrote a WSJ Op-Ed that declared that "The concept that has underpinned the modern geopolitical era is in crisis" and called for MAGA to meet the challenge from Russia and China:

Even as the lessons of challenging decades are examined, the affirmation of America's exceptional nature must be sustained. History offers no respite to countries that set aside their sense of identity in favor of a seemingly less arduous course. But nor does it assure success for the most elevated convictions in the absence of a comprehensive geopolitical strategy.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

'Isolationism' was never confused with 'unilateralism' until recently when Trump apologists and Trump critics began to conflated them.

Trump's "America First", just like Obama's "Change You Can Believe In" are slogans that we accept at our peril. Our faux populist Presidents are controlled opposition.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 22:02 utc | 69

I'll believe it when troop withdrawal have been confirmed. All this noise is a smoke screen for Trump's supporters. However, one can only fool voters for so long before they see through the bullshit. Trump's actions is that of an nationalist rather than an isolationist.

Changing the whores in public office will amount to nothing. Follow the money if one really want change.



psychohistorian | Oct 11 2019 16:50 utc | 6

When will the suffering at the bottom cause changes to the structure of our social contract that I keep pushing for?

The suffering needs to last about a generation or more before any changes becomes a reality. The question is what the catalyst will be.



ADKC | Oct 11 2019 19:21 utc | 37

Americans should be thinking of writing in Ron Paul's name in the 2020 Presidential Election.

Giant Meteor.

Posted by: Ian2 | Oct 11 2019 22:13 utc | 70

this conversation about trump never seems to end!

@ 47 william gruff... it is true there ''appears'' to be a conflict with trump and the deep state, which is different then a conflict between the dems and repugs.. and as you note, trump is no saint in any of this either.. more like your typical con man is how i mainly see him.. maybe @26 ben's statement which reflects the view of other posters here is the fact trump is most happy to comply with the same ongoing agenda - financial- military complex calling the shots, so long as he can reap from it.. and i would say trumps term coincides with the usa struggling more to maintain it's status of top dog on the world stage..

so how much of this dynamic between trump and the deep state is for real, and how much of it is due a fracture in the deep state itself which finds itself in a dilemma about how to move forward with regard to it's eroding position on the world stage?

it is true the knives are out for trump on a number of levels... however, to glorify trump in any way is a big mistake as i see it, as aside from catering to his fan base, he is a con thru and thru... the sooner the usa comes down off it's perceived pedestal, the sooner the usa can find a leader who means what they say and says what they mean, as opposed to this joke of a man trump... unfortunately i think the usa is bound to get liars and cheats as leaders until they get beyond taking sides in what the msm, or cia are giving them... until that changes, it will be business as usual, while the wheels continue to come off - in spite of the idea trump is helping to bring all this into the open.. it is going to come out into the open anyway - if the usa has a chance to survive moving forward..

@don bacon.. you forgot to mention how many american troops are in other places close by.. - "The U.S. has nearly 40,000 military personnel in the Middle East. The U.S. Fifth Fleet is in Bahrain and has 28,000 military personnel in Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar. Kingdoms, including Qatar, cover 60 percent of the costs, around $650 million."

a better question is why the fuck is the usa in syria to begin with??

Posted by: james | Oct 11 2019 22:33 utc | 71

Sorry, psychohistorian @54, but the plans of the imperial 0.1% are garbage and were further trashed in 2016. Those plans are not working. They have to buy their own stock to keep their profits artificially inflated. They don't know how to fix things because all of their economic gurus turned out to be wrong in 2008, and none have even been able to convincingly explain how things went wrong, much less how to set their economy right.

Remember starting back in the early 1990s the Big New Idea was that the Industrial Age had ended and was superseded by the Information Age? At one level this was intended to make Americans feel better about the country being de-industrialized and that industry being moved to cheaper labor markets. At another level many influential and well educated people actually believed it. The notion that the US could build its economy around making websites about dancing hamsters and such was shattered by the Dot Com bomb, though.

Check this article out. Title:The Economy Keeps Growing, but Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy under a subheading of Dematerialization. The basic premise is that America's economy is growing, but we are now in a "post material" age in which we have/use less stuff.

So Americans are supposedly wealthier, only with less material goods. Then what is this additional wealth, spiritual or something? What the hell is spiritual economic activity, other than perhaps fraudsters fleecing their flocks at megachurches or something like that?

No, the additional wealth is imaginary. There is no such thing as metaphysical wealth that can be related to economic activity. Real wealth production has been declining in the United States since the early 1970s.

Many among the 0.1% are aware of this reality, as Trump obviously is. He's a real estate oligarch, after all, and his wealth is tied to real things. This is why Trump is trying to re-industrialize America. Doubtless that is not to do American workers any favors but to revitalize American capitalism. But quite a few among the 0.1%, including no small amount from the big finance industries, still believe the nonsense about the Information Age and the creation of metaphysical value. Not surprising as metaphysical value is what they create by selling derivatives back and forth. These camps have different ideas about what, if anything, needs to be done. Of course, they are all wrong, but that is a whole different discussion. The fact that there are deep disagreements in the oligarchy is what is important here. It is important as it allows us to get past the silly notion that the oligarchy is exposing itself to the public on purpose and resorting to "The oligarchy works in mysterious ways!" to try to explain it.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 11 2019 22:35 utc | 72

An interesting article on the NSA spook and his wife who fled the UK after a fatal accident Google Craig Murray UK. Not the MSM omitting key facts again! Yikes.

For an Australian former diplomats take : https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/pm/notion-of-ally-a-flexible-one-in-middle-east-bob-bowker/11595930

Posted by: Paul Unger | Oct 11 2019 22:40 utc | 73

It’s a good point to make, that the recent US withdrawal from Syria under the pretence of decreasing American deployments in the ME, is mildly out, not supported by empirical evidence. So why then allow the Turks to enter? Another plot by US, Turkey and Saudi to destabilize Syria and the Axis of resistance?

Posted by: Ninel | Oct 11 2019 22:48 utc | 74

james @69: "so how much of this dynamic between trump and the deep state is for real, and how much of it is due a fracture in the deep state itself which finds itself in a dilemma about how to move forward with regard to it's eroding position on the world stage?"

Both, and all of it. Good observation.

The first rule of the oligarchy is that you don't talk about the oligarchy. Talking about the Deep State is way too close as that Deep State is absolutely essential to the oligarchy's survival as things are currently arranged.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 11 2019 22:54 utc | 75

The hawks are already weeping:

Goodbye, America. Goodbye, Freedom Man: Under Trump, the U.S. becomes the world’s fair-weather friend

Posted by: vk | Oct 11 2019 22:57 utc | 76

Here's the Pentagon announcement in full:
U.S. Sends Additional Capabilities to Saudi Arabia
Oct. 11, 2019

In the wake of an Iranian attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities last month, Defense Secretary Dr. Mark T. Esper announced that more capabilities have been authorized to deploy in support of the long-time U.S. partner.

At a Pentagon news conference today, Esper said he authorized the deployment of two fighter squadrons, an air expeditionary wing, two Patriot missile batteries, and a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, system to Saudi Arabia.

This latest show of support involves some 3,000 U.S. personnel, Esper said, adding that ongoing Iranian provocations have resulted in an even larger support effort in the region.

Since May, Esper said, the United States has deployed as many as 14,000 additional U.S. forces to the region, as well as a wide variety of military hardware, including airborne early warning aircraft squadrons, maritime patrol aircraft squadrons, Patriot air and missile defense batteries, B-52 bombers and a carrier strike group.

"Today I spoke with the Saudi minister of defense to discuss the status of Saudi Arabia's defensive capabilities and our ongoing efforts to protect our partners from further Iranian aggression," Esper said. "Saudi Arabia is a longstanding security partner in the Middle East and has asked for additional support to supplement their own defenses and defend the international rules-based order."

The defense secretary said the United States remains committed to protecting its allies in the region and its own interests.

"I urge other like-minded countries, especially our allies in Europe, to follow the U.S. lead and join us with their own defensive assets to ensure stability in the region," Esper said.

While Esper said the Iranians continue to deny the attack on Saudi oil facilities, evidence recovered so far proves their involvement. Additionally, he said, he’s continued to hear concerns from partners and allies in the region about continued Iranian behavior.

"There are things we pick up, if you will, through intelligence that we thought it was important to continue to deploy forces to deter and defend, and to send the message to the Iranians: do not strike another sovereign state, do not threaten American interests, American forces, or we will respond," he said. "I've said time and time again, do not mistake our restraint for weakness. If you will, you will regret that." . . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 11 2019 22:57 utc | 77

The photo you posted is, if I am not mistaken, the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P Murragh Building, and had nothing to do with Saudi Barbaria.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Oct 11 2019 22:59 utc | 78

Ninel @72: why allow the Turks to enter?

To make Erdogan look like a tough leader and to release the ISIS prisoners ISIS.

ISIS resurgence (in Syria)! Is a strange MSM-driven meme given that ISIS has spread to many countries now, from Afghanistan and the Central Asian republics; to Yemen where the Saudis have utterly failed; to Africa.

They're needed in Idlib, to protect the oil fields in northeastern Syria, and to further destabilize Iraq.

Bonus: a "resurgent ISIS" means USA needs to stay in Middle East to fight them.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 23:01 utc | 79

Biswapriya Purkayast @76:

The photo you posted is, if I am not mistaken, the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P Murragh Building

You're mistaken. Wikipedia: Khobar Towers bombing

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 11 2019 23:07 utc | 80

@ karlofi

>> There's a very good reason I ignore you and donkeytale--
>> you're two heads of the same beast, each at the ass-end of
>> the other and unworthy of debate because you have no
>> historical depth of knowledge.

Really?? I’m disappointed to see one of my favorite posters attack another, in such a manner as this.

@ psychohistorian

Your long-running “it’s a battle between private and public finance” argument resonates with me. I enjoy reading all your posts.

Posted by: oglalla | Oct 11 2019 23:09 utc | 81

@ psychohistorian
@ Posted by: oglalla | Oct 11 2019 23:09 utc | 79


> Your long-running “it’s a battle between private and public finance” argument resonates with me. I enjoy reading all your posts.


I as well; this framing is awfully useful for understanding a number of points of conflict.

Posted by: AshenLight | Oct 12 2019 0:27 utc | 82

Thanks to oglalla and AshenLight for their support

Instead of continuing to be fairly OT I am going to move my commenting about the underlying forces of our current geo-political situation in the Weekly Open Thread which I encourage other OT commenters to be mindful of as well.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 12 2019 0:40 utc | 83

Posted by: c1ue | Oct 11 2019 21:17 utc | 58

You are, of course, correct.

Posted by: somebody | Oct 12 2019 0:53 utc | 84

@79 oglalla - "disappointed to see...attack"

I suggest that what you call attack (if you're referring by this to karlof1) is actually defense. The attack has always come from the commenters he cites. Part of their MO is to insult people, insisting that they wake up or get a clue or stop being deluded or whatever personal denigration they feel is appropriate.

Other commenters routinely do this too. I disregard those also. Some commenters who don't routinely do this, nonetheless have moments when the provocation actually gets under their skin, and they respond in kind - this is the troll's greatest success, by the way. I stay with those commenters because these moments are anomalies.

People show themselves quite clearly in these threads over time. What I suspect almost all readers do is to weigh up the balance of good perspective and information they've received from one commenter versus another. I'm pretty sure they too have concluded that those who insult others are also supplying very low-grade information. It's quite marked how these two things go together.

In fact, no denigration of any kind is ever appropriate. I ignore those commenters in question, and others, precisely because they disqualify themselves immediately when they denigrate others. It's enough work to parse events and tease out the most sane likelihoods from them. Having to endure insults in the course of discussion is simply too much bullshit for anyone to take.

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 12 2019 0:53 utc | 85

Giant Meteor.

Posted by: Ian2 #68 !!! Thank you, I second that but perhaps a smallish one with a very specific target zone. Nowhere near the size of the Burckle crater incident if possible. THAT was a doozy.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 12 2019 1:00 utc | 86

so, what do people reckon is the going rate for one of the 'finest/bravest' from dumbfuckistan Trumplandia?
after all Trump is gonna make money out of sending others childrens to harms way...obviously not like hillary / obama/ bush1/ bush2/ clinton/reagun/carter/etc did cause they did it the wrong way.

but trump is gonna send 'his army' 'his soldiers' to any country offering him enough cash.

so how much is it gonna be?

as for the guys thinking that the orange shitshow is gonna bring peace and end trumpistans involvment in overseas issues protecting trumpistans interests, i would like all the drugs you take cause they seem good. Real good.

Posted by: Sabine | Oct 12 2019 1:29 utc | 87

Thanks for the excellent report, b.
This is somewhat OT, but related to the Trump role in "the agenda"/Trump independence in action subcurrent: Thierry Meyssan has an interesting take on Trump's relationship with the political establishment, and his ability to independently effect policy.
The Khobar Towers pic precisely illustrates the (still unfolding) result of US imperialism in the middle East.

Posted by: robjira | Oct 12 2019 1:30 utc | 88

@85 Sabine - "as for the guys thinking ... i would like all the drugs you take"

It's useful that you make this charge against a whole body of viewpoint in this thread because it's the perfect illustration of the denigration I was referring to in my comment at #83.

The value of the information presented matches perfectly too.

~~

I trust that other readers will take note of this style of attack and recognize it for the emptiness that it is, wherever and from whomever it appears.

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 12 2019 1:48 utc | 89

Hello, everyone. I'm new to this community, but I agree with most of what has been said.

I would also say that I wouldn't be surprised if the soldiers themselves started revolting, as what happened during the German Revolution in 1918 at the end of WW1. Eventually, US troops will get fed up with what they have to deal with. At least, I hope so. But then again, I can't say I have much respect for them either way. Many of them have killed and raped. All I'm hoping for is that America's foreign policy backfires big time.

Anyway, let's chat in my Discord server right here:

https://discord.gg/gh9C3GJ

Posted by: Hello | Oct 12 2019 2:03 utc | 90

@jackrabbit no 78:

Thanks.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Oct 12 2019 2:08 utc | 91

>Having to endure insults in the course of discussion
>is simply too much bullshit for anyone to take.
>Posted by: Grieved | Oct 12 2019 0:53 utc | 83

What Grieved said.

Meeting rules of order generally encourage speakers to address the chair rather than other speakers. So instead of saying, "X, you're an asshat!", the speaker says, "Ms Chair, the honorable X is an asshat!". Same meaning, but the message gets delivered at a slightly lower temperature. I suggest this approach is good to use here. Alcoholics Anonymous also has good guidance for meetings:

"Take what you can use and leave the rest."

With this approach, it doesn't matter whether someone is a troll or not and the constant shouts of "Troll! Troll!" are just a waste of precious electrons.

Posted by: Trailer Trash | Oct 12 2019 2:09 utc | 92

relevant article
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup

Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 12 2019 2:24 utc | 93

I'm with karlof1, Gruff and Grieved. I'm too tired for senseless debate around one note sambas..

Posted by: Lozion | Oct 12 2019 2:39 utc | 94

Laguerre @ 41 and elsewhere:

Don't worry, if the US cannot make up its cannon fodder numbers through recruitment, compulsory draft or offering Green Cards, fast-tracked citizenship, student loan debt forgiveness and shorter prison sentences or death row commuted to life imprisonment, the Pentagon can always rely on us ignorant dumb-fuck Australians to rally around the Stars'n'Stripes. No shortage of brainwashed people here in Australia willing to fight in wars which they have no clue about!

"All the way with the USA!"

Posted by: Jen | Oct 12 2019 2:44 utc | 95

@Jackrabbit #60
I disagree. If Bin Laden was pissed off by a couple thousand GI Joes, in a base far away from the major Saudi cities - the next generations of Bin Ladens are going to be doubly and triply pissed by many more GI Joes, much closer to home.

Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 3:03 utc | 96

@Laguerre #61
We all know the Saudis are dependent on US protection. However, the public veil has been ripped off only a couple of times:
1) When Saddam took Kuwait. The Saudis had to beg for protection. This was 1990.
2) Today
Note how many years and literally hundreds of billions of Saudi dollars have been spent on military gear in this nearly 30 year span.
And further note that the previous spending was mostly internal defense vs. arming groups in Libya, Syria, Iraq and fighting a shooting war in Yemen. At least half of these 4 are directly attributable to MBS, and very possibly all of them.

Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 3:06 utc | 97

@40 "Uh oh, NATO bombing NATO? Technically, friendly fire? To whose aide do UK, Germany and France come in the event of an Article 5?"

The USA and Turkey can go at it as hard as they like inside Syrian territory and neither of them can invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty.

Sorry, but Syria is outside the area of responsibility of the NATO treaty = Article 5 can not be invoked.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Oct 12 2019 3:07 utc | 98

It has nothing to do with whether the systems, the patriot missiles, work. It has everything to do with the money, the Central Banks, the dollar. It's blackmail.

Posted by: joetv | Oct 12 2019 3:09 utc | 99

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 12 2019 1:48 utc | 87

Oh i did not mean any denigration, but seriously there is an undertone of delusion that is quite amusing to some.
I confess to having been a Never Trumper from the very beginning, but then i never really suffered from that economic anxiety like the working class white population of the US in 2016, and i also don't believe that whole nations are rapists and murderers. But then i was stone cold sober when i watched that shit being said on live tv. so go figure.

Fact is that the 'information' i provided is a real question that US Americans with relatives in the Army, Navy, Air Force should ask themselves. How much will he charge to hire them out, as he himself said, Saudi Arabia should pay, they have lots of money they should pay for the use of the US Army.

And i also posit that saying bringing the troops 'home' as he did, meant for the voting class of the conman that he would bring them ' home ' to their kitchen table for dinner and not just up the base in S.A or Iraq. But again, i was very sober when i heard him make these promises, knowing that the man has never made a promise he did not break.

You might not like my tone, and that is fine, but gosh, really, when do you think is the Peace that the Conman his promised is gonna come, for whom, and will it be a broken peace if someone offers a bit more cash? Cause Trump has never made a promise he did not break, has never signed a contract he did not break, has never not stiffed contracters and above all Trump has no allies, he has only servants that he can and will dispatch to nowhere with nary a thought.

But i note your concern and will try to be a little less 'sarcastic' next time. As for Syria, the Kurds, and other assorted cannonfodder in that region - shit outta luck no matter what.

Posted by: Sabine | Oct 12 2019 3:18 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.