Shocking: Trump is the most reasonable on foreign policy

his CIA director warned the Bush administration...his director of counterterrorism also issued a warning that this could happen. these pleas were not acted upon, and 9/11 happened.
- IGIT

Just curious if you believe they told him x people are planning on hihacking z flight and flying the plane into y buildings? - clearly that is actionable intel as opposed to OBL determined to attack in US.

If not, then I'm not sure what you expected him; or anyone, to do to stop 9/11.

Although we certainly weren't hit again after that- hence the he kept us safe comment.
 
Trump is clueless and has no FP. Saddam had no trouble launching his religious program in the 90's nor did Assad have any troubles releasing and sending jihadists to Iraq on a one way trip while setting them up training camps in Syria.
 
I don't think wanting to bomb ISIS makes him an interventionist ala interventionism peddled by Clinton,McCain and the NeoCons. ISIS is soo bad that something needs to be done, especially since it was the US being the bull in the Iraq shop that brought about ISIS.

Yeah, that's why I called him "only marginally better"

And the US can support the groups fighting ISIS and also condemn the ones that are supporting them!! There is a lot of evidence that Turkey is a major funder and ally of ISIS but the US won't even touch them because it's a trusted ally in the region. If it was real serious about fighting them, the US could get plenty done without dropping a single bomb and simply through diplomacy and politics.
 
Yeah, that's why I called him "only marginally better"

And the US can support the groups fighting ISIS and also condemn the ones that are supporting them!! There is a lot of evidence that Turkey is a major funder and ally of ISIS but the US won't even touch them because it's a trusted ally in the region. If it was real serious about fighting them, the US could get plenty done without dropping a single bomb and simply through diplomacy and politics.
I think Trump is waay better. He only wants to hit ISIS, does not want to hit Assad or get embroiled in MidEast wars.
 
Just curious if you believe they told him x people are planning on hihacking z flight and flying the plane into y buildings? - clearly that is actionable intel as opposed to OBL determined to attack in US.

If not, then I'm not sure what you expected him; or anyone, to do to stop 9/11.

Although we certainly weren't hit again after that- hence the he kept us safe comment.

hi and good afternoon PIL,

from what i've read, the warnings that President Bush received weren't specific to the point where it was said that the US would be attacked by hijacked domestic civilian aircraft on september 11th.

it was more as if your personal bodyguard warned you that a family you had a historical beef with was going to attack your parents in the coming months. you can make of that what you will.

if an attack of that magnitude occurred whilst Mr. Obama was POTUS, and he'd received similar warnings from his own CIA director - i'd have been critical of him; i think many would.

- IGIT
 
I think Trump is waay better. He only wants to hit ISIS, does not want to hit Assad or get embroiled in MidEast wars.

Problem is, ISIS isn't a state with easily identifiable targets. If "high precision" drone strikes are horrible when it comes to creating collateral damage, mass bombing will be even worse.

And besides, bombing alone can't win any conflict of this magnitude. You need boots on the ground. Trump's bombing would just create more destruction. The problem needs to be weeded out from within. ISIS has tons of enemies in its region so you just need to support them economically, diplomatically and with supplies.
 
I think Trump is waay better. He only wants to hit ISIS, does not want to hit Assad or get embroiled in MidEast wars.


You do realize that Trump has said we would take the oil? There's no way to take the oil without attacking Assad or being embroiled in the ME - not to mention that just furthers the recruiting narrative that we're there to steal their oil.
 
You do realize that Trump has said we would take the oil? There's no way to take the oil without attacking Assad or being embroiled in the ME - not to mention that just furthers the recruiting narrative that we're there to steal their oil.

Ive watched a couple of videos, and to be fair to Trump, he seems to be discussing the folly of the Iraq war, and if it were him he would have just taken the oil. Its all past tense. Its hard to tell though because of his stream of consciousness speech.
 
Ive watched a couple of videos, and to be fair to Trump, he seems to be discussing the folly of the Iraq war, and if it were him he would have just taken the oil. Its all past tense. Its hard to tell though because of his stream of consciousness speech.


That's ok; sadly, I don't really expect any Trump supporter to have actually listened to any of his policies - or else they wouldn't support him.


Aug:
Donald Trump finally laid out his plan for dealing with Iran (or ISIS?) on Fox & Friends Tuesday, recommending that the United States “knock the hell out of them” and then “take the oil.”

Host Steve Doocy asked Trump about his plans to deal with ISIS. But whether he was confused or misspoke, Trump started talking about Iran. “Iran is taking over Iraq 100%, just like I predicted years ago,” he said. “I say this, I didn’t want to go there in the first place. Now we take the oil.”


http://www.mediaite.com/tv/donald-trumps-iran-plan-knock-the-hell-out-of-them-take-the-oil/



Nov:
I’m looking to take the oil. I want to take the oil. I want the oil,” Trump said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/259500-trumps-isis-plan-take-the-oil


Dec:
Trump added, “I’ve been saying for years, attack the oil. But I said a step further, attack it but keep it. I want to keep the oil.” The businessman also cited the “banks” as allegedly “pouring money into ISIS” as a result of oil transactions.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/01/donald-trump-take-oil-isis/




Jan:
All of that stuff is to be expected from the unlikely Republican frontrunner, but what does he mean by "take their oil"? Probably exactly what it sounds like—the US should go into the parts of Syria controlled by ISIS and suck the oil from the ground. Trump's never been shy about his opinion that the US should have taken oil out of Iraq, and during a speech in Michigan last December, the pseudo-fascist said, "to the victor belongs the spoils. You take the oil—you don't just leave it." Who exactly would be extracting the oil from the ground and transporting it was left unclear.

http://www.vice.com/read/donald-tru...l-their-oil-in-his-first-campaign-video-vgtrn



Donald Trump further explained his policy on ISIS on Sunday's This Week with George Stephanopolous: "I'm not looking to quagmire," Trump said. "I'm looking to take the oil. I want to take the oil. I want the oil. And I've been saying that for a long time. The Middle East is one big, fat quagmire."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...oking_to_quagmire_i_want_to_take_the_oil.html




Just for fun:
In an interview with WSJ reporter Kelly Evans, potential presidential candidate Donald Trump claims he only supports Libyan intervention provided the U.S. can "take the oil." He also warns of Iran controlling Iraq's oil if the U.S. doesn't secure it first.

http://www.wsj.com/video/trump-we-should-take-libya-oil/7E12BC15-38AE-465F-949A-CDB65ED6DC75.html
 
The NeoCons tried to invent a rationale to get the US to fight Syria by floating the ludicrous claim that Saddam's nuclear weapons tech went to Syria but I do not recal there ever being a real serious threat of the US invading Syria.

We were fighting formal Syrian military units in and around Baghdad during the invasion. It had more to do with that than anything else.
 
Back
Top