Sunday, April 9, 2017

No matter whom we elect president, we get war

Think that's cynical? Just check out these two stories:

Hillary Clinton called for Donald Trump to 'take out' Assad airfields hours before air strikes

Dianne Feinstein calls cruise missile strikes "a limited but necessary response."


roho said...

The "Independent" is a British fish wrapper.

I'm still trying to give Trump the benefit of a doubt regarding this hasty flip flop. This is not the only place in the world where innocent women and children are being killed. (Why not bomb the thugs of Africa?)

Trump also acted like a 14 year old girl that had no idea that bad things happen in the world?

As far as HC recomending the bombings prior to the actual attack, that simply confirms that she knew in advance through her deep state spies in and outside both the WH and Kremlin.

This is not however what the Trump supporters placed him in office to do.

Weaver said...

Now that the idiot has attacked, they're quietly moving to come out against the war.

"Left wing means peace." "The media never reported Obama's wars, so he must be less aggressive than Trump."

Trump might have just destroyed Western Civilisation. Maybe, what, Iceland will continue on? Or some enclave in South America? 2100 isn't so far away.

If I wanted war, I'd have voted for Cruz and his creepy Israel-worship. To my mind, Jews are mere humans like the rest of us, but that's another topic...

Europe looks against the war. So, now people in Europe think, "anti-EU means war".

roho said...

I've had some time to think about this and I may have given him credit for being smarter than he is? I've even looked for some angle for why this is a good idea for down the road?

I even found some of his appointments such as family, Nickey Haley, and Rex Tillerson as problematic.

Perhaps he is a closet Neocon?.....................Bluffing on a job bid is one thing but bluffing on a war is not cool.

rex osborne said...

Same strings, new puppet.