Trump ignores advise of allies & Pentagon - Stabbing the Kurds in the back
So now Bolton says we are staying there until: 1) ISIS is beaten, and 2) Turkey promises not to attack the Kurds. Isn't that precisely the opposite of what Trump said last week? Or am I missing something?
basil said:
So now Bolton says we are staying there until: 1) ISIS is beaten, and 2) Turkey promises not to attack the Kurds. Isn't that precisely the opposite of what Trump said last week? Or am I missing something?
What we are seeing is the fastest backpedal in the history of the Federal Gub'mint.
tjohn said:
basil said:What we are seeing is the fastest backpedal in the history of the Federal Gub'mint.
So now Bolton says we are staying there until: 1) ISIS is beaten, and 2) Turkey promises not to attack the Kurds. Isn't that precisely the opposite of what Trump said last week? Or am I missing something?
I am sure this is also a boost for our international reputation!
ridski said:
Something something red line something something
Even the Israelis have lost respect for him. You've got to admit, we went from the most powerful country in the world to the laughing stock of the world, in just two short years! And that's with him watching Fox News half of the time and playing golf the other half. Imagine what he could accomplish if he really tried!
PVW said:
GL2 said:As I've occasionally noted, I find the question of when it is appropriate to use military force to be a difficult one. The invasion of Iraq was an easy call -- that was clearly a stupid idea from the beginning, with little chance of working under the best of circumstances, and almost no chance given the actual circumstances. But even here, notice, I dodge, sidestepping the moral question and focusing on the competency one....
"Entered," no. I agree. But now we're in.
"possible to have a conscience and be involved in the world without engaging in illegal military action." Not sure how, except diplomacy while kids' flesh burns off.
But, given that we can't go back, how do we view wholesale slaughter (soon, by Turkey, of Kurds) and atrocities like gassing civilians?
Serious questions; not rebuttal.
Syria, otoh, I find to be a much harder question, in large part because it's never been entirely clear precisely what the question is.
- Overthrow Assad? Seems like a bad idea given the dearth of serious discussion of who, exactly, would be succeeding him, and what the road to establishing a post-Assad regime would look like. And while I take it Paul and other critics of Syria take it as a matter of fact that this was the goal, the actual investment of money, troops, and other resources by the US suggest that overthrowing Assad was a tangential goal, at best.
- Militarily defeat ISIS? This seems like the more central goal, though given not the only goal, and the lack of focus here seems like it undermines its effectiveness
- Prevent the slaughter of civilians? While I get the easy appeal of cynicism, I find I can't entirely dismiss this as being at least somewhat of a motivation at least some of the time. As with the "overthrow Assad" goal, though, actual commitment of focus and resources seems far less than you'd expect if this were a central goal.
Counter Iran? Maintain a strategic presence in the region? Etc... The list is long, and easy to make longer. Which in the end comes to the fact that I'm unconvinced we had a clearly defined goal, or even set of goals, going in, and things just became less defined and more muddled as time went on.
One thing that I think is very clear, on the other hand, is regardless of whatever is happening on the ground in Syria, one unequivocally positive step we could be taking is accepting more refugees from the region. Whether the US presence in Syria is making things better or worse, the one thing we certainly can do is provide a refuge for those making the difficult, gut wrenching decision to leave their homes in search of safety for themselves and their families.
I've been away. Wanted to say that I really found your post compelling.
basil said:
ridski said:Even the Israelis have lost respect for him. You've got to admit, we went from the most powerful country in the world to the laughing stock of the world, in just two short years! And that's with him watching Fox News half of the time and playing golf the other half. Imagine what he could accomplish if he really tried!
Something something red line something something
Over here, in the eyes of the general public it’s more like ‘increasingly irrelevant’ rather than ‘laughing stock’.
Six months ago, the general public viewed your president and administration as a major irritant and resented the amount of media attention dedicated to every passing whim and mood. Now, the mere indication that a news item is about anything vaguely political with links to the USA and 85% (informal survey) of people find something else to do rather than pay attention.
tjohn said:
basil said:What we are seeing is the fastest backpedal in the history of the Federal Gub'mint.
So now Bolton says we are staying there until: 1) ISIS is beaten, and 2) Turkey promises not to attack the Kurds. Isn't that precisely the opposite of what Trump said last week? Or am I missing something?
And this is like the tenth most important story of the day.
joanne said:
basil said:Over here, in the eyes of the general public it’s more like ‘increasingly irrelevant’ rather than ‘laughing stock’.
ridski said:Even the Israelis have lost respect for him. You've got to admit, we went from the most powerful country in the world to the laughing stock of the world, in just two short years! And that's with him watching Fox News half of the time and playing golf the other half. Imagine what he could accomplish if he really tried!
Something something red line something something
Six months ago, the general public viewed your president and administration as a major irritant and resented the amount of media attention dedicated to every passing whim and mood. Now, the mere indication that a news item is about anything vaguely political with links to the USA and 85% (informal survey) of people find something else to do rather than pay attention.
I was referring to the whole UN GA laughing at him, but you are probably right with irrelevance too. Out of curiosity, who are you (over there) seeing as more relevant these days? Chinese? or someone else entirely?
We’re having lots of ‘discussions’ with/about Indonesia, the Koreas and China at present; I suspect our biggest international problem is our looming federal election. Due anytime within 5 months, must be called with 3 months for the campaigns to run, and we only have about 12 days for formal Parliamentary business because the current government is too scared of the scrutiny.
Our current cabinet seems to like agreeing with Mr Trump, especially if the UK does too.
we’ve also just had a neo-Nazi scandal involving a federal Senator; not sure if you’ve heard. It’s de-railed a lot of government business completely.
As we try to get back to ‘normal’ suddenly we’re talking about paedophilia as a Home Affairs issue (usually this department blathers on about immigration and border control, citizenship etc). Thread drift over.
Interesting development about Syria quietly admitted: A BBC producer now says the attacks in Douma were staged with participation by the White Helmets. This is big news, because, previous to this only Russian outlets or people the mainstream media smeared as conspiracy theorists or just ignored were making these claims (https://twitter.com/Tim_Hayward_/status/1096295852396691456). No surprise, there are no articles about the admission, which was delivered by tweet, and the producer's twitter was then made private.
BBC Producer Says Syria Douma Chemical Attack Footage “Was Staged”
Well-known BBC Syria producer Riam Dalati shocked his nearly 20,000 twitter followers by stating that after a “six-month investigation” he has concluded, “I can prove without a doubt that the Douma Hospital scene was staged.”
Now approaching nearly a year after the April 7, 2018 alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria — which the White House used as a pretext to bomb Syrian government facilities and bases throughout Damascus — a BBC reporter who investigated the incident on the ground has issued public statements saying the “Assad sarin attack” on Douma was indeed “staged”.
Riam Dalati is a well-known BBC Syria producer who has long reported from the region. He shocked his nearly 20,000 twitter followers on Wednesday, which includes other mainstream journalists from major outlets, by stating that after a “six-month investigation” he has concluded, “I can prove without a doubt that the Douma Hospital scene was staged.”
The “hospital scene” is a reference to part of the horrid footage played over and over again on international networks showing children in a Douma hospital being hosed off and treated by doctors and White Helmets personnel as victims of the alleged chemical attack.
The BBC’s Dalati stated on Wednesday:
After almost 6 months of investigations, I can prove without a doubt that the Douma Hospital scene was staged. No fatalities occurred in the hospital.”
He noted he had interviewed a number of White Helmets and opposition activists while reaching that conclusion.
He continued in a follow-up tweet:
Russia and at least one NATO country knew about what happened in the hospital. Documents were sent. However, no one knew what really happened at the flats apart from activists manipulating the scene there. This is why Russia focused solely on discrediting the hospital scene.
Dalati’s mention of activists at the flats “manipulating the scene there” is a reference to White Helmets and rebel activist produced footage purporting to show the deadly aftermath of a chemical attack inside a second scene — a bombed-out apartment showing dozens of dead bodies.
The BBC’s Riam Dalati made his verified account private in the hours after the tweets.
Tragic and gruesome images of what appeared the “gassed” corpses of young children and women strewn about an apartment building, were recycled endlessly in mainstream media at the time, which the Trump administration referenced in its decision to strike Damascus with some 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles.
Dalati continued:
Truth is James Harkin got the basics right in terms of Douma’s “propaganda” value. The ATTACK DID HAPPEN, Sarin wasn’t used, but we’ll have to wait for OPCW to prove Chlorine or otherwise. However, everything else around the attack was manufactured for maximum effect.
The BBC producer added the following details as part of the thread:
I can tell you that Jaysh al-Islam ruled Douma with an iron fist. They coopted activists, doctors and humanitarians with fear and intimidation. In fact, one of the 3 or 4 people filming the scene was Dr. Abu Bakr Hanan, a “brute and shifty” doctor affiliated with Jaysh Al-Islam. The narrative was that “there weren’t enough drs” but here is one filming and not taking part of the rescue efforts. Will keep the rest for later.
A few hours after making the statements Dalati switched his verified Twitter account to “private”, likely after the Russian Embassy in the UK seized upon and began promoting the admission. A number of articles quickly appeared in Russian media as well.
Russian Embassy, UK ✔@RussianEmbassy .@BBC’s Syria producer @Dalatrm admits “Assad sarine attack in #Douma was staged”. Remarkable that British MSM chose to ignore it. No breaking news, no articles, nothing.
1,177 7:11 AM - Feb 14, 2019
1,186 people are talking about this
The Russian Foreign Ministry weighed in on Thursday after the BBC producer’s admission, especially since it’s been Moscow’s position the whole time that the events surrounding the Douma attack were staged.
Russia’s TASS news agency cited ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, who slammed the “theater of the absurd” connected to the April 7 events:
The culmination of this theater of absurd may be a statement by a BBC producer who confirmed based on his own research that the footage [in Syria’s Douma] had been staged with direct participation of the White Helmets,” Zakharova said, noting that Russia wants to listen to the company’s position because it actively covered the events from the perspective of supporting the steps of the so-called US-led coalition in Syria.
Russia is now demanding that the BBC produce the results of its investigation for Moscow to review and evaluate.
The BBC’s Dalati made the statements in response to a lengthy investigative report by James Harkin writing for The Intercept. Harkin had examined the scenes and physical environs of the alleged Douma attack and interviewed eyewitnesses on site. His report paints a complex picture of propaganda and deeply compromised rebel sources such as Saudi-backed Jaish al Islam, which had control of Douma amidst a Syrian government onslaught to retake the town.
The “hospital scene” footage, now called “staged” by a BBC producer, circulated widely among media outlets at the time:
DaveSchmidt said:
I’ve got a question. What’s the proof?
He provided it on twitter, but now it's a protected account. I think he interviewed a lot of people directly involved. Hopefully more about this story comes out--on the BBC. Not holding my breath though.
DaveSchmidt said:
Interviews are evidence, not proof.
He may have more than that. We don't know yet, but BBC reporters do not normally say that attacks are staged unless they really are. I'm sure this is not going to help his career. This is big news, despite it not being on the news at all.
“He may have more than that. We don’t know yet.”
Yes, let’s hope the MSM sorts all that out before running with it.
DaveSchmidt said:
“He may have more than that. We don’t know yet.”
Yes, let’s hope the MSM sorts all that out before running with it.
This is THEIR reporter telling them that it was a staged attack. This should be reported on now.
If he’s got the goods, no international corporate media conspiracy will be able to keep him down for long.
DaveSchmidt said:
If he’s got the goods, no international corporate media conspiracy will be able to keep him down for long.
Really, just like they are reporting on the Integrity Initiative and Bill Browder's fake story? The goods on both are readily available. Also, the coup in Venezuela is not really about Democracy--when are we going to hear that side? None of these important stories get covered by the MSM so I doubt they will be eager to correct their reporting on Syria. They have not even corrected the Paul Manafort meets Julian Assange story and they will probably give Luke Harding a promotion before that happens.
DaveSchmidt said:
If he’s got the goods, no international corporate media conspiracy will be able to keep him down for long.
Not sure. It took about 50 years for the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin to come out.
DaveSchmidt said:
If he’s got the goods, no international corporate media conspiracy will be able to keep him down for long.
Has anyone seen this story reported in corporate media? https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKstatement.htm
DaveSchmidt said:
Did a journalist have the goods on Tonkin that whole time?
Yes. This was written on the 30th anniversary of the Tonkin Gulf resolution, 20 years before the Government admitted it lied:
https://fair.org/media-beat-column/30-year-anniversary-tonkin-gulf-lie-launched-vietnam-war/
My bold:
30-Year Anniversary: Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched Vietnam War
Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon July 27, 1994
Thirty years ago, it all seemed very clear.
“American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New Aggression”, announced a Washington Post headline on Aug. 5, 1964.
That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: “President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and ‘certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam’ after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.”
But there was no “second attack” by North Vietnam — no “renewed attacks against American destroyers.” By reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam War.
A pattern took hold: continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media…leading to over 50,000 American deaths and millions of Vietnamese casualties.
The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an “unprovoked attack” against a U.S. destroyer on “routine patrol” in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 — and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a “deliberate attack” on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.
The truth was very different.
Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers — in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.
“The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam…had taken place,” writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were “part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964.”
On the night of Aug. 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf — a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam.
But Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to “retaliate” for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened.
[ . . . ]
In 1965, Lyndon Johnson commented: “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.”
But Johnson’s deceitful speech of Aug. 4, 1964, won accolades from editorial writers. The president, proclaimed the New York Times, “went to the American people last night with the somber facts.” The Los Angeles Times urged Americans to “face the fact that the Communists, by their attack on American vessels in international waters, have themselves escalated the hostilities.”
An exhaustive new book, The War Within: America’s Battle Over Vietnam, begins with a dramatic account of the Tonkin Gulf incidents. In an interview, author Tom Wells told us that American media “described the air strikes that Johnson launched in response as merely `tit for tat’ — when in reality they reflected plans the administration had already drawn up for gradually increasing its overt military pressure against the North.”
Why such inaccurate news coverage? Wells points to the media’s “almost exclusive reliance on U.S. government officials as sources of information” — as well as “reluctance to question official pronouncements on ‘national security issues.'”
Daniel Hallin’s classic book The “Uncensored War” observes that journalists had “a great deal of information available which contradicted the official account [of Tonkin Gulf events]; it simply wasn’t used. The day before the first incident, Hanoi had protested the attacks on its territory by Laotian aircraft and South Vietnamese gunboats.”
What’s more, “It was generally known…that `covert’ operations against North Vietnam, carried out by South Vietnamese forces with U.S. support and direction, had been going on for some time.”
In the absence of independent journalism, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution — the closest thing there ever was to a declaration of war against North Vietnam — sailed through Congress on Aug. 7. (Two courageous senators, Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska, provided the only “no” votes.) The resolution authorized the president “to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.”
The rest is tragic history.
Nearly three decades later, during the Gulf War, columnist Sydney Schanberg warned journalists not to forget “our unquestioning chorus of agreeability when Lyndon Johnson bamboozled us with his fabrication of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.”
Schanberg blamed not only the press but also “the apparent amnesia of the wider American public.”
And he added: “We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth.”
The best part is, all that time you'd be accused of being a tinfoil hat wearing lunatic for believing what is now a known fact.
paulsurovell said:
Yes. This was written on the 30th anniversary of the Tonkin Gulf resolution, 20 years before the Government admitted it lied:
I’m no expert on the Tonkin incident, and I admit to being confused: What new information does that article contain that wasn’t known two decades earlier from the Pentagon Papers?
terp said:
Not sure. It took about 50 years for the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin to come out.
And what new truth was this?
DaveSchmidt said:
paulsurovell said:I’m no expert on the Tonkin incident, and I admit to being confused: What new information does that article contain that wasn’t known two decades earlier from the Pentagon Papers?
Yes. This was written on the 30th anniversary of the Tonkin Gulf resolution, 20 years before the Government admitted it lied:
terp said:And what new truth was this?
Not sure. It took about 50 years for the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin to come out.
NSA released documents in 2005 and 2006, including an article by the NSA historian that confirmed that the Gulf of Tonkin incident -- N Vietnamese ships allegedly firing on the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin -- never happened. In 2010 the Senate Foreign Relations Committee released confidential documents that revealed Senators had doubts at the time of the alleged incident (1964).
So actually the Government admitted that it lied 42 years not quite 50 years, after the incident.
The Pentagon Papers, to my knowledge did not discuss the veracity of the Gulf of Tonkin claim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident#Later_statements_about_the_incident
Edited to Add: And of course the Government got away with its lies because corporate media propagated the lies and censored contrary information and dissenting views.
I believe the documents also showed that President Johnson clearly knew the truth, yet started/perpetuated the lie in speeches backing bombings and ultimately ground troops in Vietnam.
paulsurovell said:
NSA released documents in 2005 and 2006, including an article by the NSA historian that confirmed that the Gulf of Tonkin incident -- N Vietnamese ships allegedly firing on the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin -- never happened. In 2010 the Senate Foreign Relations Committee released confidential documents that revealed Senators had doubts at the time of the alleged incident (1964).
So actually the Government admitted that it lied 42 years not quite 50 years, after the incident.
The Pentagon Papers, to my knowledge did not discuss the veracity of the Gulf of Tonkin claim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident#Later_statements_about_the_incident
Edited to Add: And of course the Government got away with its lies because corporate media propagated the lies and censored contrary information and dissenting views.
A sample article from 1971 (NYT):
The story of how that resolution was passed is one of the more pathetic episodes in the history of a legislative body whose complaints about the inhibitions on its authority are matched only by its irresponsibility in exercising the powers explicitly granted it by the Constitution. It is also a tale of deliberate deception and manipulation by an Administration that was preparing a secret war even while denying that it was doing so to Congress and the American people.
The resolution of August, 1964, was induced by the patriotic hysteria whipped up in Congress following the supposed attacks by North Vietnamese gunboats on two American destroyers. What is important is not the hysteria, a condition as endemic to Congress as its alternate somnolence, but the fact that the first of the two attacks was provoked, and the second almost certainly never took place.
The NSA releases confirmed, and added some unknown details, to what had been common knowledge for more than three decades. I don’t remember how I learned it, but I grew up with the understanding that Tonkin was a sham. I’d frankly be very surprised if 2005 was the first time you became aware.
In any case, the comment that led to this Tonkin discussion did not suggest the press always digs as hard as it should to reveal important news. What it suggested was that the MSM is not in the habit of quashing proof that something happened. The Tonkin example misses the mark on two counts: The proof you cite was reported as soon as it came out, and evidence had been dug up and reported (like a lot of important information about the Vietnam War) decades earlier.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
I know the military has a plan for exiting, but that doesn't mean Trump does. He first said 30 days", then it became 4 months. You're also one plan behind, since it's not 4 months anymore. Note my "So there's more of a plan" post.