|Submited on :||Wed, 15th of May 2019 - 21:03:25 PM|
|Post ID :||boxoe6|
|Post Name :||t3_boxoe6|
|Post Type :||link|
|Subreddit Type :||public|
|Subreddit ID :||t5_2qh13|
We need to be reminded that Bolton was the architect of the fake "Sadam has weapons of mass destruction" justification for the Iraq war under the Bush admin.
This is why you need to prosecute if the Dems ever get back into power. Because those incideous odours don't go away, they linger waiting to come back
The Dems had full control for 2 years when Obama started in 2009. They declined to prosecute.
Yes, Obama said "Look forward, not backward." Oddly, this logic doesn't seem to apply to any charges faced by ordinary people in the courts - only to people responsible for millions of deaths.
Turns out the third time was not the charm, soooooooo I'm going all in on prosecuting the fuck out of these asshats and making tons of new laws and oversight powers to make sure it can't fucking happen again. None of this "let's move on for the good of the country" shit. The good of the country demands we clean up this rot and hold our government accountable.
Big problem. You need to fight the corporate money involved in war. It is worth hundreds of billions annually. Good luck with that.
Yes, it's very strange how the ruling class always seems to fail to hold itself accountable for it's misdeeds. Almost as though some outside entity would need to enforce that.
Well if there is no action from the people, why bother bring down "one of us"? This is one of the first principles of politics I think.
Imagine if Obama had treated Snowden like a war criminal in the Bush administration, and war criminals in the Bush administration like he treated Snowden.
People would call him a dictator for prosecuting political opponents.
It makes sense that you don't want to turn any new administration into a witch hunt for any corruption or appearance of it in the previous administration. If Obama had done it, Trump may have spent his first year investigating and misrepresenting everything Obama did.
However, it obviously has broken down to the point that there just isn't any consequences. MAYBE there will be a hearing. If there is, just say "I don't recall". If things get really bad, some middleman will take the fall, spend a couple years in prison until he can get a pardon and then get a lucrative consulting job.
Sometimes I wish I could get convicted of some massive government scandal so I wouldn't have to worry about finances ever again.
If Obama had done it, Trump may have spent his first year investigating and misrepresenting everything Obama did
I mean, if he could find something as bad as fabricating the justification for invading a sovereign foreign nation I wouldn't have minded one bit.
Also, think about the scenario you're talking about. Trump has something in his hands that he could go after Obama over, even fabricated, and the thing that tips the balance is whether or not Obama went after Bush for the yellow cake? Trump's restraining himself because the previous administration hadn't crossed that particular line?
That just doesn't sound like something the current administration would have factored into their calculus. I don't think that's the way that particular hypothetical situation pans out.
They're terrified of setting a precedent that would lead to getting prosecuted themselves. Our political system is beyond fucked.
Is it time to burn it down and start over?
I hear the French are good at this, maybe we can ask them for some advice
Dany, is that you?
They were potentially more afraid that the right would see it a persecution (I know, that side never assumes victimhood for anything) for their political stance by "the enemy" which would only escalate things. And they mistakenly thought that overtures of compromise and discussion would be well received.
Carter did the same thing. As did Clinton. It has never worked, never will. Seeing a pattern?
Not exactly. Al Franken was in runoff for quite awhile and did not get confirmed to office for 1.5 years. He had time to vote on ACA and that's about it.
Not even 1.5 because Ted Kennedy died before the 1.5 was up. He had about 1 year of an actual supermajority and people fault him for not changing the world in one year.
Reality is if a supermajority is necessary for congress to function then congress is essentially broken.
Lots of articles online debunk the whole supermajority thing:
Guess Republicans warping history and people parroting the same thing works since you hear “well, Dems has full control and they didn’t do anything” so much. The Legislative branch is the most ineffective and weakest of the 3 branches of government, imo. Over the years, they’ve eroded their own powers in favor of putting the party first.
In reality, of the past 24 years:
The GOP has had full congruent control of congress for 12 years. 50% of the past generation.
The democrats for less than 2 years.
You don't need to look any further than that if you want to know why the last few decades have been a shit-fire.
Edit: clarified since people can't into context clues.
The legislative branch has been predominantly under republican control for the past 3 decades. That's a large part of the "broken congress" thing, because they're not actually interested in good faith governance.
When the Dems came into power in 2008 the housing market had just collapsed, the economy was hemorrhaging 200k+ jobs per month, oil prices were at record highs, and five years of failed Republican policy in Iraq and Afghanistan left us in an impossible situation that spelled out disastrous outcomes regardless whether we stayed or left. The Dems had higher priorities than doling out retribution.
Nobody seems to give the Dems credit for addressing those issues; they just want to complain the Dems didn't punish the banks and the bad actors in the previous administration. Don't blame the Dems for failing to prevent bad actors in the Republican party from getting power, instead just stop voting for members of the Republican party.
I knew I had heard this bullshit before....
Putting every other, incredibly legitimate, concern aside, is anyone ready to die for Donald Trump? Ready to kill so he has a better chance at reelection? You all need to resist this shit by any means available.
that's why they hired him, my dude
And by they, you mean specifically Sheldon Adelson, pro-Israel billionaire mega donor to republicans:
ADELSON’S INFLUENCE has spread across the Trump administration. In August 2017, the Zionist Organization of America, to which the Adelsons are major donors, launched a campaign against National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. ZOA chief Mort Klein charged McMaster “clearly has animus toward Israel.”
Adelson said he was convinced to support the attack on McMaster after Adelson spoke with Safra Catz, the Israeli-born CEO of Oracle, who “enlightened me quite a bit” about McMaster, according to an email Klein later released to the media. Adelson pressed Trump to appoint the hawkish John Bolton to a high position, The New York Times reported. In March, Trump fired McMaster and replaced him with Bolton. The president and other cabinet officials also clashed with McMaster on policy and style issues.
John Bolton pushing for war despite contradicting intelligence reports?
What a unique and never-before-seen set of circumstances.
Edit: Ironic edit about r/AwardSpeechEdits
What is Bolton's purpose in pushing for war? I dislike him immensely but I am wondering what his goal would be and why he would push for war. Does he seriously think the US can win that war?
Get lucrative contracts for your friends either to build weapons or provide mercenaries or non-combat contractors
Friends provide you with money or opportunities in compensation
You are now rich. What happens to the war doesn't matter.
War is also a good distraction and statisticaly, war presidents are always re-elected.
One could almost suggest that the administration is trying to change the subject for some odd reason.
it's always about money for people like this - and considering cheney made a billion dollars with haliburton during the iraq war, i'm certain trump wants in on the action and couldn't care less about 'distractions.'
i mean, why would he? he got away with everything so far without needing a war to distract people.
i mean, why would he? he got away with everything so far without needing a war to distract people.
The person you responded to already gave another reason, re-election. He's far more likely to be re-elected if the US is at war.
Pretty soon the Republican narrative will be 'How dare Dems witch Hunt Trump during a war!'
Your loyalty and patriotism will also be questioned in very stark terms. 2003 all over again.
Yeah that "support the troops" and "if you're not with us you're against us" stuff was absolutely brilliant.
It was an easy play to make in the wake of 9/11. I think (or hope...) that they will have a tougher time pulling it off this time around.
For sure. The world is radically different this time. The U.S. has been at war since 9/11 and it’s now stale (war should always be stale). Throwing support behind a president due to the sole fact that we are at war doesn’t make a ton of sense right now.
Trump is sending your children to be handicapped and traumatized so he could get re-elected and make himself great again.
This is all reminding me of the movie Wag The Dog. We are at the point where reality is stranger than fiction.
1a. Help distract the US populace from the overwhelming legal battles that are about to come crashing down on Trump and everyone he's associated with in the last ten years.
Thought Trump was fixing on North Korea / China at the start of the Mueller investigation, now looks like Iran / Russia. I suppose this time there will be little to no support from allies (apart from KSA / UAE). I doubt that will impact the Trump Bolton strategy meetings.......I'm sure Putin will have some advice on the matter though so all not lost
edit - spelling
Thought Trump was fixing on North Korea / China at the start of the Mueller investigation, now looks like Iran / Russia.
Of course he changed his focus. He expected China to drop to their knees immediately under the US pressure. China basically said "Screw you, we plan long term so we'd rather bite back and sit this one out as long as it takes instead of acting weak". Plus he expected NK to hand him a win on a silver platter by at least playing along the "We do peace for great president Trump" game but they did what they always do, take the win for themselves by being legitimized by the US and then turn around and say "Screw you, back to our rockets".
Now he has lost all this ways to show how great he is, is under massive pressure from all sorts of proof that he isn't rich but a criminal and forcing a war to unite the US citizens is his last way out to be this super powerful guy he dreams of.
Our political cycle makes it so much harder for us to plan long term like China. Not saying I prefer Chinese authoritarianism just that we're at a disadvantage here.
The problem is that the benefits a democracy grants have been killed by people who want to be authoritarians.
A democracy and the original american dream, same chances for everybody and wealth for all mean a strong middle class, an ok lower class and a lot of potential. If you are poor but your family can still send you to college easily you can prosper and help the country. If your parents have to work 3 jobs each and you grow up with no foundation to become successful you'll be a burden on the society later on.
The funny thing is that long term this actually benefits everybody, even the richest people in the country, but those already incredibly rich wanted to squeeze out even more money and now you are in a situation that countries like China are directly threatening the US economy in an ultra massive way because all jobs were outsourced, all profits were centralised and the country couldn't be selfsufficient if it tried. Plus the infighting that was started to keep poor people from looking at the real issues tears the country apart, people start fighting against education because they now believe science is bad and if this keeps getting worse you'll have the country going willingly into isolation which never in the history of mankind actually helped a country.
And they outsourced the jobs to help finish killing the unions and to finally have leverage over the American worker. For fuck's sake, look what happened to Detroit!
It wouldn't be so hard if we didn't elect morons who have no understanding of geopolitics, no concept of economics, and weren't corrupt.
This is why fixing, enriching, and expanding your public education system should be one of the US' and especially democrats first priorities. If people are less dumb on average they'll elect less dumb leaders and fall for less dumb bullshit on average.
Strange that these same people who rely on the dumb ones to elect them are basically in charge of the amount of money goes to schools... Hmmm...
I thought Metal Gear Solid was fiction...
Information control, PMCs, military industrial complex insanity... Nah. Hideo knew what he was talking about.
It's a pretty common theme in modern science fiction, specifically because they are very real concerns in the modern world. That's always been a great thing about science fiction, it lets writers and readers explore pressing modern issues from different perspectives.
What happens to the war doesn't matter.
Better yet, if the war goes poorly or never ends, then you just have to spend more on the military and on weapons systems. So 'ideal' becomes something that drags on forever.
You are now rich. What happens to the war doesn't matter.
The unique viewpoint of a country that has never been invaded. It's strange if you think about it that the only wars in "recent memory" the US ever fought are on foreign soil.
That’s neo-imperialism for you.
Don't forget a huge poll boost for conservatives as nothing is a war to bring everyone together and support the troops and such.
Bolton is the epitome of the conservative war-hawk. He thinks every international dispute can and should be solved with military action. Might Makes Right. Diplomacy is weak and mockable.
And, like many other conservative war-hawks, he's a blatant hypocrite and coward who avoided being sent to Vietnam by joining a National Guard unit that was never deployed. He loves war unless it's his own ass on the line.
People have been paying so much attention to Trump, that they've forgotten that Bolton is a far more dangerous piece of shit.
When I found out he was going to be Trump's NSA I legitimately got sick to my stomach.
He doesn't care about winning the war, he starts them.
"I've hired you to help me start a war. It's an prestigious line of work, with a long and glorious tradition. "
Bolton has been pushing for regime change in Iran for at least two decades now, primarily because he is a member of multiple organizations (American Enterprise Institute, Freedom Capital Investment, etc.) that would profit substantially from both the conflict and propped-up government at its conclusion.
The ideological angle doesn't really hold up, as Bolton has been a stalwart defender of Saudi Arabia (who is as bad or worse than Iran when it comes to human rights violations) for at least as long.
The ideological angle doesn't really hold up, as Bolton has been a stalwart defender of Saudi Arabia (who is as bad or worse than Iran when it comes to human rights violations) for at least as long.
The ideological angle for attacking Iran isn't about doing so for human rights violations, it's that Iran is an active and disruptive agent in a vital geopolitical area and they aren't aligned with the US or its key allies in the area (Israel, Saudi Arabia). People like Bolton see Iran as a direct threat to American interests in the Middle East and think it's simply easier and more effective to take them out militarily rather than put in the effort to resolve everything diplomatically.
For the record, I am not a supporter of John Bolton. That's just my take on him.
Wrong angle. Bolton doesn't care about human rights or democracy. Bolton cares about American power and American interests, and he views Iran as an impediment to both. KSA is not.
Its not the winning or the losing its the taking the money that counts.
The US don't need to win. The military industry just needs to make a shitton of weapons. Thats hard cash going straight from the taxpayer to the pockets of important contributors and, by association, members of the GOP.
Sitting on the board of a major defense contractor after your Washington tenure is the wet dream of most republican politicians. Wars are the best way to make that happen.
It couldn't be that there's an election coming up and war has always been a great distraction for the American people, could it?? No way they would do something so despicable.
You think John Bolton would do that? Just lie and manufacture issues for the purpose of giving money to the American war machine?
I'm putting my money on a missile attack on the USS Ronald Reagan.
Going to have a Gulf of Tonkin Incident 2.0 called the Strait of Hormuz Incident.
I think it already happening with the oil tankers being 'sabotaged.' Notice they didn't explode into a million fucking pieces but just enough damage to show that something was done, and we need to do something about it
They're going to say that Iran's attacking us through the Houthis/Hezbollah and will try to use that as justification to take military action, I think.
John Bolton was part of the think tank Project for the New American Century that wrote a report in September 2000 saying the only way to overthrow Saddam Hussein was to have a new Pearl Harbor and a lot of conspiracy theorists think that's evidence of 9/11 being an inside job.
It doesn’t have to be an inside job. All that was needed was for US and Saudi intelligence to ignore Bin Laden for a while.
I cannot wait for the WMD argument...in....3.....2......
Where have you been? They already did that. The US unilaterally pulled out of the nuclear deal, then accuses the Iran of breaking the deal that they themselves ended and the Iran is no longer bound to, and use it as rationale to move an aircraft carrier to Iran's coast in the Persian Gulf. And somehow it will be all spun as Iran's fault for escalating.
What the Nazi Göring said after defeat
Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.
Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.
Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
"Only Congress can declare wars." Lmao, if only that mattered at all.
they temporarily gave away that power and forgot to take it back.
Hey, what a coincidence, that's also how Hitler rose to power. They temporarily gave him emergency powers and he just never gave them back.
Echoed throughout history going back at least to Caesar.
In fairness, when the Romans did it they did keep giving it back until Caesar.
The senate made him dictator for 10 years in the hope of returning to normalcy after that, but ended up killing him before that was up.
Edit: I should add that before that, dictatorship or the Senatus Consultum Ultimum (empowering the elected consuls with dictator like powers) was only for a term of 6 months or shorter.
Sanders was working on reimposing Congress' powers on matters of war. I think it was withe vote on Yemen. I'm at work, so I can't research further.
The US hasnt declared a war since WWII, all "wars" have been "police actions", or "direct military support", not "wars"
This is why I don't like people who dismiss everything you say when you compare them or something they support to the Nazis.
Comparing someone or something to Nazis isn't always about trying to say they are evil murdering racists. The Nazi government was also highly organised and led by very intelligent people. But those intelligent people eventually became evil murdering racists.
That's why it's important to recognise certain patterns that might repeat itself during the course of history, not to call people evil murdering racists, but to prevent them from becoming evil murdering racists.
Recognise and point out people or organisations who are on the same downward spiral as Nazism once was and use it to prevent worse. That's the 'gift' they left us with.
Well most people crying "but everyone keeps calling me a naazziii" are talking about stuff that's more like "hey this thing you said has some questionable biggoted implications...", and don't care so much about the Nazi part as the "if I can discredit those corporate sjew anarchists as calling everyone Nazis, then I can ignore them entirely without thinking about their words" part.
Bolton will just make up something and trump will believe it. The best people. :/
Bolton needs only tell Trump that it would help/guarantee his reelection. That's all Trump needs to sign for the war.
Putin is invading the former soviet bloc, so he just tells Trump that if Putin can do it and look strong, he needs to as well. Fits right in with praising all these Authoritarian state leaders.
and the republicans will follow. dems are just impotent and powerless
He's wanted America to fight a war in the middle east his whole political career. Trump wants are war because he thinks it will make him look heroic. They are both assholes.
Trump supporters will eat it up too.
The NYT reporting on this is unsettling. Not only is the US publicly trashing this guy - in itself pretty stunning - American, EU and Iraqi officials are all telling NYT on background that the administration's objective is war. Trump has made it too easy to be yanked along. His insecurity caused him to cancel the black guy's nuclear deal, and now that it has failed so embarrassingly, with not a single EU ally signing on, Bolton knows Trump will feel he has no choice but to play tough guy.
Now Bolton just needs a match. He knows Iran will never light it, but what about a vaguely associated militia?
'In Yemen’s civil war, the Houthis are Shiite rebels who oppose a government backed by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other Sunni nations. The Houthis’ ties to Iran are murky. But the Trump administration labels the rebels as Iranian proxies, and Mr. Bolton’s statement left open the possibility that a Houthi attack on Saudi Arabia or the U.A.E. — both United States allies — could set off an American military assault against Iran.
He doesn't need a false flag. He can just wait for some militia to attack literally any ally, claim they did so on Iran's orders (using evidence he is actively cherry-picking at CIA HQ just this week), and use it to launch another decade-long war in the Middle East.
The NYT Daily podcast also had a great episode about this the other day. The topic was how the US is squeezing Iran with all of the economic sanctions they placed after withdrawing from the Iran Nuclear Deal. This has led to an economic downturn in Iran, and I would say that even failing a militia attack, they're hoping for widespread economic desperation in Iran and a potential uprising of the citizens against its own regime - which Bolton/Trump would immediately label as "freedom fighters" and back with extensive military force.
In addition to that, in early April they also designated an elite part of the Iranian military (IRGC) as a terrorist organization. Which means that if this group carries out any operations in the region, they can label it as a terrorist attack (right or wrong) and use it as another excuse to attack Iran.
they're hoping for widespread economic desperation in Iran and a potential uprising of the citizens against its own regime
Which won't work, because secular Iranians are forced to admit that the US was the aggressor here, so for the first time in decades the Islamist cretins aren't at fault. Every capricious dick move by the US has strengthened the mullahs by making them look reasonable by comparison.
But Bolton is fine with this because he doesn't want a western liberal democracy in Iran. He just wants chaos and war.
Yeah I could see discontent being a thing since there's a bit of a disconnect between Iranians and their government, but it's also kind of blatantly obvious that a foreign power is to blame for most of their problems. Super ironic since usually that's just a scapegoat.
usually that's just a scapegoat.
Yeah, the Iranian Islamic revolution came totally out of the blue with nothing to see with violent US anti-democratic action in their own country.
You make the enemy -> you defeat the enemy -> you keep the spoils.
Kinda like how Hamas are the best thing to happen to Israel. They have a powerless boogyman that they can point to as an excuse to continue to colonize the region. Its a self feeding system.
If Hamas went away, they would say Hezbollah is infiltrating the region, rinse and repeat until you get an ever expanding Israel.
The thing is, secular Iranians aren't the 2-dimensional pieces on a chess board that Trump and Bolton think they are. They might hate the regime, but they hate them for different reasons. They know exactly where the economic problems they face are coming from.
From the same source that put them in this position in the first place
Yeah, this Trump Administration is not going to win over Iranians with their war drums.
He can just wait for some militia to attack literally any ally, claim they did so on Iran's orders
Yeah, just sprinkle a little WMDs on 'em in the subsequent 'investigation'.
Nothing like a good war to cause a distraction.
War time presidents usually get elected to a second term. That’s all he cares about. If you think his first term was bad, how will he act when he doesn’t have the fear of being voted out.
I’ve said from the beginning, Trumps 3rd term will be his worst...
using evidence he is actively cherry-picking at CIA HQ just this week
He doesn't need evidence.
He just has to say the words "Iran bad did bad thing, me good, make them pay" and 43% of America will believe it.
Get Sean Hannity to devote a couple segments over two nights to support his brain droppings and boom, the majority of Americans are primed for war with Iran.
Don’t forget “those terrorists hate us for our freedom”
Iran still holding up its end of nuclear deal, IAEA report shows (Feb 2019)
Iran honoring nuclear deal as new sanctions hit, IAEA report shows ( Nov 2018)
Iran Continues to Comply With Nuclear Deal, U.N. Atomic Agency Says (Aug 2018)
"The Trump administration has certified Iran’s compliance twice before: in April and in July. After hundreds of inspections, the I.A.E.A. has produced eight reports confirming that we are meeting our obligations under the agreement. " (Oct 2017)
Yes, but you see, Obama made that agreement. Therefore, it is bad and evil. Therefore, any nation participating in that bad and evil agreement is bad and evil for doing so. Thusly, Iran is evil due to their compliance and their men, women and children must be killed.
don't think I need this, but reddit has surprise me on this front before: /s
Ah the ol' "Don't change horsemen mid-apocalypse" setup. Been waiting for this to kick off, really. Worked for George.
Oldie but a goodie: Vote for Nixon in '72, why change dick's in the middle of a screw!
Bolton was brought into Trump's administration for one reason: war with Iran. This administration has done everything it can to secure a shooting war with Iran, short of firing the first shot. And by declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organisation, this administration is free to enact its will. All Trump now needs is an excuse - any excuse, real or fabricated - and the Saudis (yes, those Saudis) will provide it. Pompeo is a liar: the US is going to war with Iran. Trump's political future relies on it because nobody would impeach a sitting President during wartime.
People are going to die because of Trump's corruption and crimes. The man is psychotic.
Remember when people voted for Trump because he was going to get us out of pointless wars?
Yeah. But there's a point to this one: Trump's self-preservation.
Cant even take care of the vets from the previous war what a bunch of cocks
Bruh, they finna take all the vets from the precious warS and give em a third campaign ribbon for a new war. Most economical way to deal with vets, just ride them until the legs fall off.
Get ready boys and girls. We're about to repeat the last 16 years. Unjust, bullshit war in third year of Republican's first term. He gets reelected and then the economy crashes towards the end of his second term, and then a Democrat takes over to try and clean up the majority of the mess while passing half measures that don't address the root of the problem.
I'm calling it now. We didn't learn shit from history and now we're about to repeat it.
Trump is getting this conflict ready for the upcoming election. Just like he used the border for the mid-terms, Iran will be for his election. I expect we'll see him restart negotiations with NK not long before the election too.
It’s so obvious I’m surprised that anyone’s falling for it.
Stupid's gonna stupid.
Depends on the fox news spin. They can get that hate machine throttled up pretty high in a few short days. All you need are a few small events to fuel the outrage. Of course anyone outside of the bubble will see it as bullshit but I wouldn't be surprised if they think they can get away with starting a war.
Can you imagine having to put your life on the line in a war this shithead started just so it would distract people from his tax returns? The country will burn if they try this
If there was any justice in the US, Bolton would be sitting in a jail cell somewhere for his war crimes. But he's back in government again trying to do even more war crimes. Honestly, what the fuck.
Well that's never going to happen in a country where Kissinger is not locked up for eternity.
Like Bolton has ever needed "evidence" to start a war.
It's interesting that Bolton, who once said "I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice patty" w regard to fighting in Vietnam, has no problem sending our soldiers to die in the Middle East, for absolutely no reason at all. These actions are clearly a plan to throw us into a war without any provocation whatsoever. It is also very interesting that all of this is happening in an election year.
This is the golden opportunity for Trump. Drag this out a few months, beat the war drum, then start a war. Scare his base into believing Iran poses a threat to our “freedom” to help improve his odds of reelection.
Wasn't I being berated by trumpists only recently because as a critic of his I "love war" and trump is the price of peace?
I will be livid if the UK mindlessly follows the US into a war with Iran.
No way the UK invades Iran. Europe are trying to save the deal because it is working. Iran has never started a war in its history. We are the adults in the room
Honestly fuck the US. Nearly a million civilian deaths in Iraq was not enough?
'They hate us for our freeeedom!' No you morons they hate because you act like massive dicks meddling in countries on the other side of the world and supporting brutal dictators because they comply and sell their oil in dollars
There would be likely be a change of Government - the current one is already teetering - if Mr Corbyn was then to be elected any troops or aid (including the use of air-space or bases ) would be immediately withdrawn. Iran is the line in the sand - just like Vietnam was for the Wilson Government.
This should come as NO SURPRISE.
Bolton is a Neo-con akin to Dick Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, et. al.
As is Pompeo. These guys are ITCHING for war. And Trump is egging them on because as everybody knows, wars increase his domestic approval.... Fucked up.
Trump thinks if he starts a war he will automatically stay in office after the election.
I guarantee it.
Poking Iran with a stick isn't a foreign policy strategy.
You think he’ll declare some kind of national emergency and say he must remain in office? I wouldn’t put it past him
Sounds like the contractors want some work. Id rather just pay two contractors to fight each other than drag another country like iran into something.
Well Boeing is down from th 737 Max...
This administration makes Bush's WMD bullshit almost sound believable in comparison. Dubya must watch the news every morning with a big smile on his face knowing that his legacy of putziest president is being totally overwritten forgotten.
Bolton was the architect of the WMD strategy for Bush
Fun fact: the “Iraqi National Congress”, an anti-Saddam group that created the bogus intelligence used to start the war, was represented in Washington at the time by Manafort and Stone’s lobbying company.
It’s not a coincidence that they’ve been grooming Trump for sometime either. And the first thing he does is remove the Iran deal.
At least it is starting to make more sense now why Trump is swinging at Iran. They've groomed Trump for it, then put Bolton (I masturbate to War with Iran) in as his NSA. Ugh...
There is a trust-fund chickenhawk playbook that is being re-run.
This is something I actually fault Obama for - Cheney had Valerie Plame outed as a CIA officer, on foreign deployment, in wartime because she honestly reported that the yellowcake story was bullshit.
Cheney is in Wyoming with a new heart and a secret service attachment flying him around to go fly fishing in helicopters when he should be rotting in prison for treason.
Obama let it go because "healing"
Absolutely will not support another Democrat that doesn't support the rule of law - if our republic isn't lost, it's going to be because strong liberal voices demand justice and hammer the racist tyrants back into their cesspools permanantly.
The Brit called it out. He named the source of danger to protect his troops - the US. There is no leadership at the government levels in the UK cos brexit so he is naming and shaming in the hopes the war can be headed off. He knows these guys make wars happen.
Bolton is either completely bugfuck insane, or just the most contemptible scum on the planet. Although possibly both.
Vote for both.
History doesn't repeat, but often rhymes. Like Barr before him, Bolton is simply doing what we expected based on what he did in the past.
Barr aided the cover-up of the Iran-Contra scandal by the George H.W. Bush administration by advising the pardons of six people deeply important to the investigation. Later, he gave a misleading summary of a secret memo on kidnapping foreign officials ( U.S. military took Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega into custody in 1989), which influenced Congress. The report was only handed out in full years later, and the summary left out "some of the most consequential and incendiary conclusions from the actual opinion."
On his side, Bolton was a "champion for unilateral and violent resolution of international differences." The INR (State Department intelligence bureau) dissented from the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraqi WMD warning the available evidence was inadequate to support the judgment that "Iraq is currently pursuing…an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons." Bolton knew that the administration was misrepresenting this to public, and his behavior "not just disregard[ed] important information, but actively tr[ied] to suppress independent analysis." He heavily foreshadowed this by calling for war in Iraq to oust Saddam in the 1990s, and later "maintained that deposing Saddam was worth the effort—even if the decisions made after the invasion weren’t always right."
Barr was primarily known for making misleading summaries to influence Congress and the media and covering up serious scandals affecting Republican Presidents. He was appointed by Trump and shortly afterwards made a misleading summary of the Mueller report and attempting to do all he could to provide cover for Trump.
Bolton was primarily known for calling for war in Iraq to oust Saddam, and later justifying the a war in Iraq under false pretenses to achieve that objection. Shortly after becoming the NSA he advised the US to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal, argued recently in The Wall Street Journal for a preventive first strike against the regime of Kim Jong Un, and apparently is using false pretenses to justify a war in Iran.
Gotta start a war before the next election. We've seen this before.
I swear to God, I'm not getting sent to Iran just to kill some people I have no issue with living. I now know exactly what it feels like for our politicians to drag us into a war and have us die for nothing just like during Vietnam.
Are we the baddies?
This was precisely what we went through in the build up to the Iraq war, folks.
British General is right on point.
The cycle continues. Every time we put Republicans in power they start a war under false pretenses. Every single time. The most dangerous political party in the world. When are we going to learn?