Patrickov wrote:I must say I am glad to learn a new way to interpret trolling. Meanwhile, I suspect that not everyone shares this interpretation, and it is possible that at a certain time more people believe his opponents.
The progressives and the political left in America will never understand Trump's genius, because their definition of intelligence is always subordinate to their political ideology. Hence, they cannot respect him as a worthy adversary. Trump's genius in 2015-2016 was that he took on issues that were very popular with the American populace, but very unpopular among the establishment; namely, stopping illegal immigration, and addressing unfair trade practices from China and Mexico. So he put the American people on his side from a policy perspective, but to get his message out, he used political correctness to his advantage. For example, he said that illegal aliens were murders, rapists, and some were good people. Yet, he knew full well that the media would deliberately mis-report what he said, and his supporters would find out what he had actually said and learn they had been misled by the media. In effect, he received tons of free media. Trump is someone who believes that there is no such thing as bad press. At any rate, in post-election analysis, some people estimated that Trump received as much as $50M in free press.
You have to remember that in 2016, Trump's negatives were North of 50%, but Hillary Clinton's were even higher. Trump understood this instinctively, but the mainstream media seemed to miss it entirely.
Patrickov wrote:I must say that I still find the decision to withdraw from Syria and the recent assasination somewhat contradict each other.
Iran is not a US ally in spite of their opposition to ISIS. Trump had no intention of staying in Syria, and he said so while running for office. Nobody should have been surprised, but I think the war industry in the US wants as much war as they can get so they freakout at the prospect of either peace or US non-involvement in a war. Iran does not want the US in Iraq or being close to its government in any way. While Iran was helpful to Iraq in the fight against ISIS, American fire control and air power were superior in every way to anything Iran could offer. So Iraq wisely chose to gain help from the US. Now that ISIS is defeated for all practical purposes, Iran has decided to engage the US in Iraq albeit indirectly. The US does not have to tolerate that, and when it came to loss of life and the threat of more, Trump acted.
Patrickov wrote:If that is the case I am scared as well. In the military there should be professional service to assist in the President's decision, not merely executing it without question or adjustment, which My Friend seems to imply.
The military most certainly provides its input, but refusing an order is generally subject to court martial unless they can establish that the order was unlawful. Usually, the president or his subordinate listen. Sometimes they don't. For example, Robert McNamara ordered US planes to fly the same routes in bombing Hanoi and Haiphong harbor, and the North Vietnamese just learned the routes and times and were able to shoot down American aircraft more effectively.
Patrickov wrote:If My Friend a military chief, will he "just do it" if Trump decides to bomb the heck out of Iran (and kill all of its population as well as cultural sites) right now? (Edited because nuking can be done on the President's whim)
Presidents definitely get push back--usually by someone offering to tender their resignation.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden
"Our literature is equated with dynamite. This is a great honour for us, I think"
- By Pants-of-dog
- By Rancid
- By Rugoz