The Official Former President Trump thread

[Savage Henry]

32 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Patrick Cockborn, usually solid on the Middle East and certainly not a mouthpiece for London or Washington, thinks the evidence points towards a Syrian chemical attack. Not that firing a bunch of cruise missiles at them would do any good though.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-chemical-weapons-attack-explained-douma-air-strikes-russia-assad-a8300086.html

 

14 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

Big fan of Patrick (and Andrew) Cockburn. Have a lot of respect for journalists that do much more than just pontificate in their weekly column on whatever’s in the news. It’s undeniable that Patrick knows his stuff and has committed his time, energy and nearly his life into covering the wars in the Middle East.

 

I'd agree with this.  

From a personal point of view, as someone who has been to Halabja (and subsequently glows green at night), I have a hard time believing this was anyone other than the Assad government.  If John Bolton wasn't involved, I'd have absolutely no doubts.  But he's only been there five minutes.  In the end, though, historians will have a hard time removing M.E policy from US/Russian relations - a bit like Vietnam.  

[Forest of Dean]

BTW there definitely won't be a hot war with Russia so everyone can relax in our comfy Western homes.

The Middle East will continue to be the site of a bloodbath and proxy warfare. That will go on for at least another decade.

[NotThePars]

I'd agree with this.  
From a personal point of view, as someone who has been to Halabja (and subsequently glows green at night), I have a hard time believing this was anyone other than the Assad government.  If John Bolton wasn't involved, I'd have absolutely no doubts.  But he's only been there five minutes.  In the end, though, historians will have a hard time removing M.E policy from US/Russian relations - a bit like Vietnam.  

The crucial thing, I think, is that he doesn’t categorically state that Assad is responsible and that air strikes are an ultimately futile gesture at this point. The Lion of Damascus is going to take his country back at this point.

[Savage Henry]

3 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

The crucial thing, I think, is that he doesn’t categorically state that Assad is responsible and that air strikes are an ultimately futile gesture at this point. The Lion of Damascus is going to take his country back at this point.

 

Right.  What it does make clear though is that these gas attacks did happen.  

I think Syria is all but gone as a functioning state.  For that, Assad is entirely responsible, but also the only one who can do anything about it.  Won't stop the US/Russian pissing contest though, even if that pissing contest has no chance of achieving a winner.

Edited April 11, 2018 by Savage Henry

[Zetterlund]

The Independent has been one of the better outlets for coverage of foreign policy issues generally. I will take issue with something he said there though, that the Syrian/Russian line on the attack being a setup being just a conspiracy theory not backed up by evidence. Not only is there plenty of photo and video evidence of the rebels producing chemical weapons in the area of the recent alleged attack, but the Russians have been warning about an imminent fabricated event for some time after getting information from their own intel and local tip-offs. It's not like the attack happened then they suddenly claimed they had info about it all along. It happened exactly as they said weeks ago.

There have also been local accounts from people who fled the area, that the rebels killed hostages to use in their snuff porn propaganda videos. Apparently over 3000 people were kidnapped over the years of occupation and only a couple of hundred were returned when the last of the rebels surrendered. So it may well have been a real attack with real victims.

In short, there is more than enough evidence to raise serious questions. And that's not even touching on how ridiculous an idea it would be for Assad to do this when he allegedly did. It would be an astonishingly stupid thing to do, just when he's on the verge of victory.

It really cannot be overstated how ridiculous the situation is when we're considering military strikes against a country which has been fighting international terrorism for 7 years, on the strength of unverified evidence produced by a group called Army of Islam whose stated goal is the eradication of Shi'ites and the establishment of a Sharia state. We have absolutely lost the plot.

 

[NotThePars]

Right.  What it does make clear though is that these gas attacks did happen.  
I think Syria is all but gone as a functioning state.  For that, Assad is entirely responsible, but also the only one who can do anything about it.  Won't stop the US/Russian pissing contest though, even if that pissing contest has no chance of achieving a winner.

I haven’t focused too much on a lot of the debate about whether it happened or not. Remember the debate the last time being ridiculous. I get my ridiculous quotient from reading Phil Greaves’ support for Assad and the ongoing maintenance of the Syrian state.

[Forest of Dean]

https://washingtonpress.com/2018/04/09/unsealed-court-records-just-revealed-whole-trump-family-faces-criminal-charges/

Not the best source but looks as if prosecutors are closing in on Trump's real ties to the Russian mob. There are links to original court sources there.

My guess on this is that Trump SoHo was a money laundering project on behalf of the Russian mob. Trump's name on the front is about providing a legitimate business front so monies can be more easily laundered.

[welshbairn]

Right.  What it does make clear though is that these gas attacks did happen.  
I think Syria is all but gone as a functioning state.  For that, Assad is entirely responsible, but also the only one who can do anything about it.  Won't stop the US/Russian pissing contest though, even if that pissing contest has no chance of achieving a winner.

I disagree that Assad is entirely responsible. Without Qatari and Saudi support for the Jihadis it's conceivable that a peace settlement could have been arranged years ago. There is no compromise with groups determined on extermination, and Assad would have doomed the Allawite population as well as many others if he'd stopped fighting. Although brutal there was little sectarian discrimination under his regime except for the very top jobs which were reserved for family.

[Savage Henry]

I disagree that Assad is entirely responsible. Without Qatari and Saudi support for the Jihadis it's conceivable that a peace settlement could have been arranged years ago. There is no compromise with groups determined on extermination, and Assad would have doomed the Allawite population as well as many others if he'd stopped fighting. Although brutal there was little sectarian discrimination under his regime except for the very top jobs which were reserved for family.

 

Yeah, I didn’t intend to imply that Syria’s situation was entirely internal. Clearly there are broader influences beyond the state. I would say his actions and reactions to genuinely democratic civil rights groups have compounded the splintering (if that isn’t a contradiction) of his country.

 

One of the main reasons that the Arab Spring failed in Syria was due to the regime and the military being one and the same. The military couldn’t turn against itself. In Egypt, and even Libya, they weren’t the same, and so could turncoat against the government.

 

Anyway, it’s really not helpful to analyse Syria or Iraq or many middle Eastern countries simply as competing states (functional or otherwise).

[welshbairn]

 

Yeah, I didn’t intend to imply that Syria’s situation was entirely internal. Clearly there are broader influences beyond the state. I would say his actions and reactions to genuinely democratic civil rights groups have compounded the splintering (if that isn’t a contradiction) of his country.

 

One of the main reasons that the Arab Spring failed in Syria was due to the regime and the military being one and the same. The military couldn’t turn against itself. In Egypt, and even Libya, they weren’t the same, and so could turncoat against the government.

It's proven now that the Egyptian State is the military, just with a different figurehead. All possible opposition candidates are either in jail or scared off. The only place the Arab Spring worked was the place that started it off, Tunisia. Elsewhere it brought chaos, Libya and Syria, or brutal suppression, Egypt and Bahrain.

P.S. Egypt looked willing to give democracy a chance until Egyptians voted for the wrong candidate. The military own half of Egyptian industry, and they weren't going to give that away. A bad message is that if you want to achieve a moderately Islamic government through democratic means, forget it, they'll throw you in jail and execute your leaders. If you're lucky.

[Savage Henry]

It's proven now that the Egyptian State is the military, just with a different figurehead. All possible opposition candidates are either in jail or scared off. The only place the Arab Spring worked was the place that started it off, Tunisia. Elsewhere it brought chaos, Libya and Syria, or brutal suppression, Egypt and Bahrain.

I think that’s a slightly revisionist outlook. It’s important to see the Arab Spring as something distinct from its outcome. Whether it failed or succeeded or temporarily succeed is not really the issue.

Historically the Egyptian military put checks and balances on their government. To that end, it wasn’t the state. They were not always the government, and in fact the Egyptian military were at the forefront of what was ostensibly a full court press against authoritarian leaders, and political Islam (and boy there’s an enigmatic notion).

That they are the same thing now does not mean they were six years ago, even less so during the Qtub era.

Whatever the outcome, the Arab Spring was definitely and defiantly a move away from certain state structures towards others. It may well be a case of “what could have been”.

The role of the military in Egypt has always been political, but in Egyptian terms it has been relatively liberal, or perhaps it’d be better to say less authoritarian.

And of course, politics in the Middle East will always play to a “higher” goal that the state.

[welshbairn]

I just think the lesson of the Arab Spring is that Facebook, Twitter and bloggers can kick off a rebellion but once they've gone home to get get their laundry done they need the support of the equivalent of Trump voters to get the job done. It's easy to stir up the support of educated members of the global twitterati, but it's not enough to overcome an entrenched regime. In Syria they just gave time and space for the Jihadis to get organised and take over.

[NotThePars]

I just think the lesson of the Arab Spring is that Facebook, Twitter and bloggers can kick off a rebellion but once they've gone home to get get their laundry done they need the support of the equivalent of Trump voters to get the job done. It's easy to stir up the support of educated members of the global twitterati, but it's not enough to overcome an entrenched regime. In Syria they just gave time and space for the Jihadis to get organised and take over.

There’s an argument (potentially made by Cockburn or someone else) that the placards written, allegedly overwhelmingly, in English were for western audiences in the hope of enlisting western support for the revolutions. That the strikes hit Libya and we’re now left with slave markets and thousands drowning in the Med leads you to question whether the air strikes really accomplished anything positive.

[welshbairn]

2 hours ago, Zetterlund said:

The Independent has been one of the better outlets for coverage of foreign policy issues generally. I will take issue with something he said there though, that the Syrian/Russian line on the attack being a setup being just a conspiracy theory not backed up by evidence. Not only is there plenty of photo and video evidence of the rebels producing chemical weapons in the area of the recent alleged attack, but the Russians have been warning about an imminent fabricated event for some time after getting information from their own intel and local tip-offs. It's not like the attack happened then they suddenly claimed they had info about it all along. It happened exactly as they said weeks ago.
There have also been local accounts from people who fled the area, that the rebels killed hostages to use in their snuff porn propaganda videos. Apparently over 3000 people were kidnapped over the years of occupation and only a couple of hundred were returned when the last of the rebels surrendered. So it may well have been a real attack with real victims.
In short, there is more than enough evidence to raise serious questions. And that's not even touching on how ridiculous an idea it would be for Assad to do this when he allegedly did. It would be an astonishingly stupid thing to do, just when he's on the verge of victory.
It really cannot be overstated how ridiculous the situation is when we're considering military strikes against a country which has been fighting international terrorism for 7 years, on the strength of unverified evidence produced by a group called Army of Islam whose stated goal is the eradication of Shi'ites and the establishment of a Sharia state. We have absolutely lost the plot.
 

I agree with a lot of that, and I don't think there's any doubt that the opposition have used chlorine in the past, I just don't trust the photos of a chemical lab somewhere described as liberated territory in a place that has been continually bombed for the last 5 years. How easy would it have been to set that up? A lot easier than a chemical bombing by helicopter. A reason for the Syrians to use gas to finish off the place could have been to spare their troops from basement to basement and tunnel to tunnel clearing of suicidal resistance. Apparently chlorine gas goes down. I'm not convinced they did it though, and neither are the Germans or I think the UK. "Likely" is not enough to start bombing and killing. I should add that Syria and Russia have left ISIS alone for the main, Syria from near the beginning because they saw how good they were at killing the other opposition and how they diverted attention from the West towards them. And the Russians because why bother when  America and the Kurds were doing it for them.

Edited April 11, 2018 by welshbairn

[Zetterlund]

19 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I agree with a lot of that, and I don't think there's any doubt that the opposition have used chlorine in the past, I just don't trust the photos of a chemical lab somewhere described as liberated territory in a place that has been continually bombed for the last 5 years. How easy would it have been to set that up? A lot easier than a chemical bombing by helicopter. A reason for the Syrians to use gas to finish off the place could have been to spare their troops from basement to basement and tunnel to tunnel clearing of suicidal resistance. Apparently chlorine gas goes down. I'm not convinced they did it though, and neither are the Germans or I think the UK. "Likely" is not enough to start bombing and killing.

I understand the scepticism, about pretty much anything on every side, with the messy and generally inaccessible nature of the conflict zone. For me it just comes down to the credibility of the evidence & sources, as well as the usual means & motive etc. The apparent discovery of the chemical workshop for example, is a continuation of the theme throughout the conflict where abandoned bases & weapons etc are found, often literally with 'made in the USA' on them. It would be different if this sort of evidence appeared after the fact but they have been consistently documenting it.

[welshbairn]

I don't see Bashar Assad as an evil monster by the way, more as a younger brother destined for a civilian life as an opthalmologist until his brother died in a car accident, Godfather style. He made some efforts at limited liberalisation after he took over from his Dad but I don't think his outer family allowed much, and the uprising turned him into brutal survival mode, for his Allawite tribe more than himself imo. I suspect he'd far rather be working for Specsavers in Dorking.

Edited April 11, 2018 by welshbairn

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Americans are shite about letting bygones be bygones.

On the other hand

The council of Ho chi min city are shite at letting Saigons be Saigon

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Its a witch hunt the man child is crying about on twitter

While wearing a pointy black hat, stirring a cauldron and cackling

[welshbairn]

My bet is Putin will give Trump a get out like he gave Obama, a path to a peace settlement or something that he can declare a big victory for his deal making, and there will be no attack. Here's hoping.

[welshbairn]

Anyway, back to the Whitehouse. Happy days!