Lion of the Blogosphere

Lion prediction

with 105 comments

If the Kurds are slaughtered by Turkey, Republicans in the Senate will abandon Trump and vote to remove him from office after Democrats impeach him.

* * *

Is there a single Republican Senator who supports Trump on this? I don’t know the answer. I do know that Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz have all spoken out against it.

Graham said on Fox News this morning, “The safe zones were working. Patrolling with Turkey and international forces to protect the Kurds and Turkey is the way to go. If we pull out, the Kurds are in a world of hurt and ISIS comes back, and President Trump will own it.”

* * *

At Breitbart, presumably the most pro-Trump “news” site on the web, Turkey is conspicuously absent from the front page, even though it’s the top news story everywhere else, including Fox News. Even Breitbart can’t find anything good to say about Trump’s decision.

The best Breitbart can do to support Trump is a buried story reporting that both Assad and Iran have condemned Turkey. The obvious implication is that if Assad and Iran publicly state that they are against it then that means it’s good for the U.S.

But I suspect that, in private, Iran’s government is pretty happy about America’s weakness.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

October 9, 2019 at EDT am

Posted in Politics

105 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. If Kurds are killed nobody in US will care.

    We barely care about destroying jobs in our own country. If Kurds aren’t being killed by Europeans nobody will care.

    Curle

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

    • People will care because it will be the lead story on mainstream news sites. People care about what they get shown. People are suckers for videos of dead children.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 9, 2019 at EDT am

      • Exactly. “Somebody doooo something!!”

        Which is how we get into this shit to begin with.

        Funny how the old antiwar left is okay with these neocon adventures.

        Mrs Stitch

        October 9, 2019 at EDT am

      • “Funny how the old antiwar left is okay with these neocon adventures”

        Weirder than that, there were anti-war groups out protesting Trump in Minneapolis the other day. Have they decided they miss war?

        Mike Street Station

        October 12, 2019 at EDT am

      • It is somebody else’s turn to dooooo something!

        I do not want even one American soldier over there or anywhere. Let them defend themselves. Israel is an ally and faces more threats than Turkey or the Kurds, and we aren’t over there baby sitting them. We sell them some stuff and say some swell stuff, and their people do the actual work. And they have damned few people.

        totally sick of foreign wars that are not about us.

        not too late

        October 12, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I would care.

      Frau Katze

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • So would I. If they get slaughtered after we had assured them they wouldn’t, that would be dishonorable.

        I don’t want “endless wars” as I’ve said repeatedly but the guys deployed there were professional soldiers who knew what they were getting into, not 18-year old draftees.

        gothamette

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  2. It may be worse than that.

    Again: I do not know all the facts because I’ve been purposely not paying attention to the ME for 15 years but apparently this Kurdish faction has been watching over ISIS prison camps. I shudder to think what might happen if, in the confusion of war, they cut loose.

    This will be blamed on Trump.

    gothamette

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

  3. If the Kurds are slaughtered by Turkey, everyone will have forgotten about them by the time it becomes an issue.

    We abandoned the Montagnards. Who paid the political price for that? Who even remembers the Montagnards?

    Wency

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

  4. No one cares. He is ending a war that nobody cared about in the first place. 99% of Americans have no idea why we are even there. The generals don’t even know why we are there. If GOP Senators turn on Trump because of the Kurds they will be ending their own careers and bring down the entire Republican Party. Their voters will never accept that they chose the well being of Kurds over protecting the lives of their own countrymen.

    B.T.D.T.

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

    • The Republican establishment is not very smart, but are they stupid enough to blow up their chance at the presidency, and probably hundreds of down-ticket elections? I do not put it past them.

      However, I think it is unlikely Erdogan will press the Kurds any time soon, not while people are watching, and Trump has made it known he would retaliate. He will wait until there is no more attention on him.

      Lowe

      October 9, 2019 at EDT am

      • “The Republican establishment is not very smart, but are they stupid enough to blow up their chance at the presidency, and probably hundreds of down-ticket elections? ”

        They want to lose. They want to burn down the party to get Trump. And those are Trump’s allies.

        Mike Street Station

        October 12, 2019 at EDT am

    • I think people assume we’re there to fight ISIS. No one understands why we were supposed to fight Assad though. All we got was “CHEMICAL WEAPONS”. No one has been able to explain why it’s OK to bomb someone with explosive or incendiary weapons but not CHEMICAL WEAPONS. Churchill was puzzled by these objections 100 years ago, and no real arguments have been made since then. So I have to assume if the casus belli is given as “CHEMICAL WEAPONS”, the real answer is something more nefarious (usually: to justify the MIC).

      Wency

      October 9, 2019 at EDT am

      • Obama did nothing when Assad used chemical weapons. It was TRUMP who bombed some targets to retaliate when that happened.

        We are only in Syria to fight ISIS, and mostly as advisors and providing air support for our allies, primarily the Kurds.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • US involvement in Syria dates to 2011. ISIS did not become a substantial player until 2014. Obama absolutely targeted Assad, he just didn’t bomb him directly, mainly because he figured it would be unpopular.

        Wency

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • ” It was TRUMP who bombed some targets to retaliate when that happened.”

        Yes, and do you remember how people (mostly on the alt right) screeched about that? I said it would all blow over, and soon. Check your comments.

        This, not so sure.

        gothamette

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I have a positive opinion of Assad because he is a secularist. Who exactly did he use chemical weapons on? If his “own people” are ISIS or other crazies who want to turn Syria into an Islamic state I am glad he used those weapons. He should so whatever it takes to keep Syria secular.

        Jay Fink

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “”What really interests me is the alt-right’s response to this. Richard Spencer has totally lost his cookies and is calling for demos against World War III.”

        He’s still an asshole.

        “Why are they so crazy about 59 cruise missiles? That’s a burp, military wise. Or a fart.”

        I never got an answer to that.

        gothamette

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • @Gothamette:

        I don’t think it was just the alt-right that was anti-war. Funny enough, Scott Alexander posted about how everyone he knew, right and left, was strongly opposed to intervening in Syria, and he was surprised when it turned out to be enormously popular in the vast middle. But we don’t see as many “alt-left” opinions out where we’re sitting.

        The concern of the left, as always, was escalation — the 59 missiles were just the start. For the right, it was viewed as a signal that Trump was not interested after all in a new foreign policy that prioritizes the defense of Western civilization against Globohomo and foreign migration.

        Wency

        October 10, 2019 at EDT am

      • “I think it’s pretty naïve to call Erdogan a “crazed Islamist lunatic”. To me he appears to be a pretty smart dictator” I personally started to distrust him because Gaza Freedom Flotilla aka the Flotilla of Hate.

        Eliezer Marom

        October 10, 2019 at EDT am

      • @Eliezer:
        If making Americans and Israelis happy was the key to holding power in the Mideast, House Pahlavi would still reign in Iran. Backing that flotilla helped him domestically, and moves like that are why he is powerful.

        But no, I wouldn’t trust Erdogan to do the right thing, helpful thing, or friendly thing. I would trust him to do the power-accumulating thing, which is rational dictatorial behavior, not lunacy.

        Wency

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “I don’t think it was just the alt-right that was anti-war.”

        I know that.

        gothamette

        October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

      • @Gothamette. You don’t need to remind me that a history book written in 1982 can be good. In fact, there’s a growing problem with political correctness in modern books (some authors can be trusted).

        Thanks for the tip.

        The Middle East is a really controversial area since the creation of the state of Israel. The Arab reactions are so weird. Muslims saying that Jews are European colonists, despite the Koran recounting tales about Jews living in what is now Saudi Arabia. Despite it being common knowledge that there were Jews all over the Middle East until the creation of Israel.

        They don’t even try to make decent arguments. Zero sophistication.

        Frau Katze

        October 12, 2019 at EDT am

      • Chemical weapons are a taboo in the West because of the damage done in World War I. But it’s just a taboo. There isn’t a rational reason why dying by High Explosive is better than chemical burns or choking. The rest of the world didn’t care about World War I and don’t see chemical weapons any differently than any other weapon.

        Mike Street Station

        October 12, 2019 at EDT am

      • exactly. Assad is nowhere near as bad as the islamic fundies who would take over and start some serious slaughtering. In the middle east, it isn’t possible to just be Mr. Nice guy. They are profoundly violent cults and their supporters or folks they are controlling. Rulers have to crack down on them, or you end up with Afghanistan, not Minnesota.

        not too late

        October 12, 2019 at EDT pm

    • You’re probably about the ignorance. There’s two reasons I know anything about it. The first reason is 9/11. I never heard anything about Muslims before and I set about to learn more. There were no Muslims living here (and there still aren’t many).

      Secondly, for two years I did some blogging, and I followed everything closely. I was even reading the Bangkok Post for news on their Muslims on their southern border. I would create a summary every month. I at length found a book on the topic.

      Places like Pakistan were so bad it would have been too much effort to track everything. But I read the (English language) Express Tribune.

      I also followed MEMRI, who translate articles. I read a whole pile of books.

      For example, a book about the Muslim Brotherhood by an Arab academic from a UK university.. The MSM don’t know what a cult they are. Members are advised to put 100% trust in their Muslim Brotherhood leaders. Independent thought is unthinkable. I had no idea they were that bad.

      I also read the English language liberal Turkish paper, I can’t remember the name now. That was in the period when Erdogan was transitioning from what idiot leftists (like The Economist) thought was modern and reasonable to a crazed Islamist lunatic with a fondness for the Ottoman era. I believe that paper is now just another Erdogan outlet.

      But after two years I burned out. I was reading news, books or blogging the entire day (it was right after I retired).

      Frau Katze

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I think it’s pretty naïve to call Erdogan a “crazed Islamist lunatic”. To me he appears to be a pretty smart dictator. He has built up Turkey’s economy while simultaneously consolidating power. He had to play up Islamism because that was the only political cause powerful enough to disempower the Kemalist generals, who otherwise would have overthrown him. Then he had to turn against the Gulenists, since they were the only Muslim faction powerful enough to threaten him. His biggest mistake was underestimating them and nearly getting killed in their coup, but in the end he survived and liquidated them.

        As for Ottoman pretensions, well, I’d watch Erdogan closely, but if we were in the Turks’ position, I think we’d have an interest in our neighbors too. Turkey’s borders were drawn when the Turks were probably the weakest they’d been for a thousand years (if we consider the Seljuk Empire). Now Turkey has recovered, and Arabs are as pathetic at warfare as ever. Turks are a huge minority in Bulgaria, Iraq, and Syria, so of course a more powerful Turkey is going to take an interest in their fate. This doesn’t mean we can’t oppose their meddling, just that there are reasons for the meddling besides megalomania.

        Wency

        October 10, 2019 at EDT am

      • Yeah, I burned out on ME politics about 15 years ago. But I guess I gotta get un-burned out.

        ” I read a whole pile of books.”

        Read Arabia, The Gulf and the West, by J.B. Kelly. It’s NOT outdated although it was written in 1982. You will learn how the US became the imperial power of the Gulf, after British power faded and then got pushed by us.

        Also, Corelli Barnett, although he doesn’t write specifically about the ME, is a good source on how the Americans helped to destroy British power. It’s an interesting perspective for a Yank.

        The good side of Steve Sailer is his sensitivity to the importance of the British Empire. We’re all still living in the consequences of the breakup of the British Empire.

        gothamette

        October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

  5. People keep referring this circus as an impeachment process. The Dems are not interested in impeachment. They’re campaigning. This is a reality show. And Trump is the king of reality TV. He will relish every moment of it and sail into term 2.

    Andrew E.

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

    • exactly..this impeachment story is all a stage play for the voters…of course the establishment loves trump now that he has fully cucked…nothing will be done by trump except tweet–that is all he has ever done and all he will ever do…they will of course not convict him after impeachment…he is the establishment’s tool

      rapping boomer

      October 10, 2019 at EDT am

    • Did you ever consider that you might be wrong?

      A presidency can unravel with shocking quickness. Look at Bush the Elder.

      gothamette

      October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

  6. And what if blacks are slaughtered??!!!!

    The Social Justice Warrior, y'all. Fried Chicken.

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

    • Let’s all wear safety pins to protect them.

      MoreSigmasThanYou

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  7. Rand Paul

    Randy

    October 9, 2019 at EDT am

  8. Rand Paul has lavished praise on the President for his decision, and Tucker Carlson is cheering it on as well. Most of the major Pro-Trump personalities on social media and the internet are full of praise too. There is simply no valid reason for the US to remain in Syria. The war is over. ISIS is defeated. The idea that allowing Turkey to kill some terrorists and Syria to retake full control of all its territory is going to “enable” ISIS is absurd. Syria, Turkey, Russia, and Iran area all united in their determination that never happen and they are are than more than capable of ensuring that it doesn’t so long as we just get the heck out of the way. Syrian Army would probably just shoot all those Euro Jihadis we have in a cage and dump them in an unmarked grave. Give Russia the coordinates and they would happily barrel bomb the prison. These arguments the Neocons are pushing out don’t even make any sense. Lindsey Graham pulled 1% support when he ran for President. That is a pretty good proxy of the grass roots support that a permanent US presence in Syria has among the Republican voters.

    FatDrunkAndStupid

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Rand Paul is a nutjob who has mostly been anti-Trump. No one takes him seriously except for some nutjobs on the internets.

      Tucker Carlson is being a loyal Trump supporter.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Rand Paul was elected by the people of Kentucky, not nutjobs on the internets. His support does not mean nothing, sorry.

        Lowe

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Cue Manhattanite disgust for the people of Kentucky.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Rand is popular enough in Kentucky that Mitt latched on to him six years ago to help him win his re-election race. And Tucker is not just being a “loyal Trump supporter”. Tucker is genuinely MAGA and especially when it comes to foreign policy.Last night he ended an interview with a Neocon by saying the people responsible for keeping us in Afghanistan the past 18 years should be in jail.

        I just think you are overestimating the “risk” for Trump and the deep unpopularity of these wars. Remember the South Carolina GOP Debate?

        FatDrunkAndStupid

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Why won’t Rand Paul visit a nursery school?
        He’s afraid the toddlers might beat him up.

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • If you think Tucker Carlson is a “loyal Trump supporter” you really are showing your utter ignorance of what’s going on.

        Tucker is no fan boy of the President. Saying otherwise is fake news in the extreme.

        gda53

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Tucker Carlson is being a loyal Trump supporter.”

        You might need to watch Tucker more. He’s not a slavish supporter in the Hannity style. He criticizes Trump when he needs it. In fact, Tucker has more in common with the commentariat of this blog. Most are Trump supporters of some degree, but show no hesitation and letting him have it when he’s wrong.

        Mike Street Station

        October 12, 2019 at EDT am

  9. Trump promised to get us out of foreign wars. He has to get us out of somewhere — Afghanistan, NATO, Syria, Yemen, etc. Maybe Syria is the best choice for withdrawal.

    Roger

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  10. You had it right a few weeks ago: Republican senators don’t want to lose re-election and this doesn’t change anything on that front.

    Alexander Turok

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  11. Lion, did you hear that they’re removing the logic games from the LSAT? What are your thoughts on this? This dumbs down the LSAT considerably, no?

    Tom

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Here’s an Atlantic article from 2016 arguing that the logic section causes elite law student bodies to remain UMC because prepping for it is expensive.
      https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/10/the-lsat-is-rigged-against-the-poor/504530/.
      Question: does the following statement from the article itself contain a logical error?

      Only 5 percent of students at elite law schools come from families that fall in the bottom half of the socioeconomic spectrum—a number that has hardly changed since the 1960s.

      Remember, no one did prep classes in the ‘60’s-70’s.

      Vipltd

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • It’s totally false.

        A test-prep book only costs a few dollars. If you can’t muster the effort study for that, then you shouldn’t go to law school because law school is a lot of work.

        Law school admissions have always been a lot fairer than MBA admissions or undergrad admissions, because law schools have always heavily looked at grades and LSAT scores and a lot less on the holistic crap that people from rich families are better at gaming.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I’ve never taken the LSAT, but if the logic section is anything like the logic section of the GRE circa 1999 (which I did take, did absolutely no prep work for, and did well on,) it’s pretty much straight g factor. Of course the mainstream liberal view is that intelligence can be taught, hence the Atlatnic article, but the real reason poorer applicants do worse is that they’re innately less intelligent.

        Hermes

        October 10, 2019 at EDT am

    • My thoughts are that due to mixed marriages we are becoming Argentina, demographically speaking. In Argentina, prospective lawyers must complete an undergraduate law degree (five to six years), and then become a member of one of the jurisdictional associations. There is nothing like LSAT.

      My 2¢

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • What da? Argentina? blacks and Eastern Asiatics aren’t key demographics in R-hen-tina!

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  12. They were going to vote to remove him anyway. When Trump’s strongest ally in the Senate is Lindsey Graham that really says something about where they stand.

    Nova_negativist

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  13. Which Kurds? Just men, possibly fighters? Or women and children too, or what?

    How many?

    CMC

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  14. Lion as you recently acknowledged, your track record of Trump predictions isn’t exactly stellar. I suspect Trump will sail through this just fine. And Republicans in the Senate will be more concerned about their (Trump loving) base and their seats than about more infighting in the Middle East.

    Roli

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  15. OT: the Trump Curse strikes again.

    Andrew E.

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  16. Heard this sound bite which I will pass along: “It should be as easy to get out of a war as it is to get in.” If these R senators want a war so badly they can pass a declaration of war, as the constitution anticipates.

    More than a few people are seeing this as a return to lawful governance not governance by media shriekers.

    Curle

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  17. The public went along with the Syrian intervention because they were told it was necessary to defeat ISIS —- a rogue state, not a bunch of scattered terrorist cells. Now that ISIS is defeated staying there means becoming a faction in the Syrian Civil War, which nobody outside the Beltway ever wanted or will want. I’ve seen a lot of scathing commentary on Trump’s decision, but what’s remarkable about it is how few of them are willing to state clearly what a post-ISIS US involvement means — they know as well as Trump does how toxic it is. It is, in fact, the foreign policy establishment stoking the civil war that created the power vacuum which allowed ISIS to exist in the first place.

    Turkey’s foreign policy is stupid too (destablizing Assad creates space for the Kurdish separatists in Syria, which is a real dumb thing to do when you have your own Kurdish separatist minority along the border), but two NATO countries pursuing two stupid foreign policies at cross-purposes with one another is a recipe for endless war. With Turkey’s self-interest involved they might be moved to reach an actual settlement: leave Assad in power, in exchange for strong controls on Kurdish activity that would cut off arms and troop movement into Turkey. No settlement is possible as long as the US is stirring the pot with a goal that alienates both Turkey and Syria, not to mention Iraq which has its own Kurdish problem. Trump didn’t create the map or the ethnic patchwork that makes the Middle East such a mess.

    Richard

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

    • It’s more like the people have finally wised up that they’re being lied to constantly about these foreign military boondoggles. They just want out and the details don’t matter.

      ISIS was effectively a privateering operation funded and protected by certain governments including the USG towards the end of destabilizing the region. The USG was never in Syria to fight ISIS and has been utterly irrelevant to that end. Russia, Iran, and the Syrian Army fought ISIS. If Putin had not put his foot down and deployed Russian SAM systems, ISIS would still be running around.

      That the average American doesn’t know all that is irrelevant. They’ve figured out that they’re being sold a bill of goods and will ignore all these cries for Americans to get mixed up in this nonsense. Something surprising like 60% of Americans now thinks there’s a government conspiracy behind 9/11. The point here is that the people are not going to swallow *any* more reasons to go fight in deserts, not even crying kids. If you map GWOT combat casualties to congressional districts you get one of the highest power predictors of Trump upset.

      Those rust belt voters that made him president flipped from democrat *because* of the anti-war stuff during the campaign. If he backtracks on getting us out of any of this pointless crap in Syria/Iraq/Afghanistan/Yemen he’s toast. That groundswell of support will either stay home or cynically vote for free shit from Bernie. I think somebody actually explained to Trump recently that he is done if he delivers nothing he promised on the ME foreign policy front, and that’s why he fired Bolton and is going ham on the Syria entanglement again. Obviously it’s also why drudge neocons are smearing Trump now, on cue.

      bobbybobbob

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “It’s more like the people have finally wised up that they’re being lied to constantly about these foreign military boondoggles. They just want out and the details don’t matter.”

        I agree that we have been lied to and that a lot of people want out at any cost. But I still think the details matter. There’s no reason to be careless just to get out or we’ll end up with an even bigger mess.

        “ISIS was effectively a privateering operation funded and protected by certain governments including the USG towards the end of destabilizing the region.”

        I’ve been saying that for years.

        “Something surprising like 60% of Americans now thinks there’s a government conspiracy behind 9/11.”

        There was definitely a government conspiracy concerning 9/11. But the conspiracy wasn’t that the government did it. The conspiracy was that the government used it to get us into wars that we shouldn’t have. Not unlike Pearl Harbor and the sinking of the Lusitania.

        “and that’s why he fired Bolton”

        I have mixed feelings about Bolton. He’s pretty much right about who the good guys and bad guys are. But he wanted to intervene and regime change the whole world. And that was a mistake. We should have been much more judicious about where and how we intervened.

        destructure

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I can’t stress this enough: the Turkish president is an Islamist and a megalomaniac. He is the worst leader Turkey could have now. In my readings (quite a bit, see earlier comment) I rarely saw that level of craziness.

      It didn’t have to be like this. That’s the shame about. It’s not just Kurds he has no regard for. His own citizens are victims too, many are in prison.

      The Iranian Ayatollahs are pretty bad but he’s worse.

      Frau Katze

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • > Turkish president is an Islamist and a megalomaniac

        Who cares. Let him drive Turkey into the ground. It’s of no concern to America. The worse he and his neighbors fuck up their societies, the more the only viable oil export market is north america.

        Erdogan’s hilariously bad at understanding economics and business. He’s like some FDR/Hitler character out of the 30s who thinks he can pep talk the country into not being an over-regulated and over-taxed shit-hole.

        bobbybobbob

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

  18. LOL. You can’t impeach Trump for abandoning the Kurds any more than you can for fleeing Afghanistan.

    Brendan

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Trump can be impeached for any reason that a majority of Representatives want.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Any reason?

        And convicted in the Senate?

        What if it’s not a high crime or misdemeanor and the Supreme Court agrees with him? Two out of three ain’t bad. What happens then?

        CMC

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • The Supreme Court doesn’t get to override a conviction by the Senate.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • [The president] can be impeached for any reason that a majority of Representatives want.

        There is an assumption that Congress contains reasonable and fair men.

        Maybe that assumption doesn’t hold anymore; maybe modern politics selects for party hacks and radical fools.

        bomag

        October 10, 2019 at EDT am

    • “The Supreme Court doesn’t get to override a conviction by the Senate.”

      The Senate can refuse to consider the faux impeachment by the House if there is no vote.

      then it would presumably go to the SC for consideration. And then we would have a definitive court decision on the absolute need for a full House vote.

      Which will inevitably be decided in the Senate’s favour.

      gda53

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Lion,

        “The Supreme Court doesn’t get to override a conviction by the Senate.”

        Why not? What do you mean by ‘override.’ A president couldn’t file suit? His lawyers couldn’t do so on his behalf? The SC couldn’t then write up an order disagreeing with the Congress as to what constitutes a ‘high crime or misdemeanor’? What would stop them?

        I’m asking you to play it out: Congress convicts him of something, Trump files suit, and the Court says, ‘Nah, that’s not a high crime or misdemeanor.’ What next?

        CMC

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  19. Lion,

    “Graham said on Fox News this morning, “The safe zones were working. Patrolling with Turkey and international forces to protect the Kurds and Turkey is the way to go. If we pull out, the Kurds are in a world of hurt and ISIS comes back, and President Trump will own it.”

    None of this make sense. The US is protecting the Kurds with the help of Turkey? If so, then why would Turkey attack the Kurds once the US leaves? Furthermore, are there that many US troops that would really make a difference…or are they counting on a tripwire, where the US starts a war with Turkey?

    But…Turkey is a NATO ally. Does the rest of NATO come to Turkey’s aid…against the US?

    map

    October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Don’t be stupid, of course no one would come to Turkey’s aid against us. NATO is fed up with Turkey, they are just too cowardly to kick them out.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Then Turkey is the Kurd’s problem alone.

        map

        October 9, 2019 at EDT pm

      • A wise man once said “NATO is totally obsolete!”

        Why is the USA in NATO?

        bobbybobbob

        October 10, 2019 at EDT am

    • It is basically the same thing as the DMZ. Use the troops as human shields. Lindsey wants US troops to illegally occupy Eastern Syria, in perpetuity, so that Syria and Turkey have to kill American troops if they want to get their land back or make punitive raids against terrorists. When did the American Public ever sign up for an eternal occupation of Syria? It is madness.

      FatDrunkAndStupid

      October 10, 2019 at EDT am

  20. Impeaching Trump pre-2020 is stupid. He’ll just get re-elected and the impeachers will have serious issues getting elected again in many cases.

    The Libertarian Party is focusing on local office and will not field any strong Presidential candidate this election. That means that 3+ MM votes they activated in 2016 will go against any far-left socialist the Dems come up with. Anti-war is their issue. Trump understands this.

    Robert

    October 10, 2019 at EDT am

  21. I don’t like Trump at all, but I heartily agree with his remark that America’s greatest mistake was to involve ourselves in the Middle East. We should blame Kissinger for that. We should have remained completely neutral in the conflict between Israel and its Muslim neighbors and let our economic interests alone (e.g., oil) determine whom we made friends with in that godforsaken part of the world. We should have let the West Germans be the champions of Israel from the get-go. They’re the ones who had to make amends, not us.

    Mister Triple 800

    October 10, 2019 at EDT am

    • “I don’t like Trump at all, but I heartily agree with his remark that America’s greatest mistake was to involve ourselves in the Middle East. ”

      It has nothing to do with Kissinger.

      Our involvement in the Middle East is because of two factors. Of course, Israel. But more important Aramco/Saudi Arabia.

      I realize that this book might tax your little brain but try to read it anyway:

      https://www.amazon.com/Arabia-Gulf-West-B-Kelly/dp/0465004164

      More about Kelly:

      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/6227955/Professor-JB-Kelly.html

      Kelly was an old British empire hand who knew his stuff.

      Basically, after WW2 the US pushed the UK out of the gulf and assumed policeman powers, to keep the oil flowing.

      Since I know the responses of the alt right nitwits like the back of my hand, don’t try to say, “We don’t need that oil!”

      We actually do – US companies have billions of dollars of infrastructure invested in KSA and other parts of the Gulf. Anyway that doesn’t apply to the period we are referring to.

      So shut up.

      gothamette

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I realize we had been developing oil interests in the Middle East long before Kissinger. And I’m also aware of British mishandling of the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. All I’m saying is that we should have steered as clear of politics as we possibly could have and done nothing to antagonize the keepers of the black gold. THAT’s what I meant by staying out of the Middle East – I meant its politics. Let the “policeman powers” be the responsibility of the United Nations as it should have been and let our corporate money speak for us rather than our guns and our blood and our planes. Maybe we chose the strategy we did initially for the sake of the oil, but it was the wrong choice to get as involved as we did. Neutrality was in our best interest. And there’s no need for ad hominem abuse of my supposed “little brain”.

        Mister Triple 800

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “We don’t need that oil!”. That is now fact. The US does NOT need that oil.

        BUT, the companies who have billions of $$ of infrastructure in KSA etc. DO need the US Government to ignore the fact that the US is now self-sufficient in oil and to protect their interests anyway.

        Plus, the safe passage of oil in the ME IS important to our ‘allies’ in Europe and around the world, and therefore should be at least considered in our future strategy.

        That’s why the Europeans invest so much in ensuring that the shipping lanes remain open. Oh, wait. They don’t, you say? It’s the US that does that?

        You may be guilty of living in the past. Kelly WAS an OLD British hand and I’m sure he knew his stuff. Once upon a time when things were completely different. Before Trump made us self-sufficient in oil and gas.

        Were you one of the many people who were shocked when Trump asked about the current day purpose of NATO? It’s the same thing, essentially. Times change.

        When times change, your strategy changes. Unless you are hide bound. And who’s more hide bound than the US Military?

        And of course things were a lot different in the old days when ME oil was essential to US security. Nowadays, the equation is different. People in Europe (and elsewhere) who have a direct stake in not freezing to death need to take on responsibility.

        Which Trump is encouraging and to which the Europeans are saying “Who, us?”, just as they did when Trump demanded they pull their weight with NATO.

        gda53

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Nothing you wrote is relevant to what I actually wrote. You just wrote a lot of shit to show off.

        gothamette

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • US power worked out great for giving us control (direct or indirect) of Mideast oil from 1945 to 1973 or so. In the 50 years since, it hasn’t accomplished a whole lot.

        I don’t believe our oil companies have any ownership in Saudi oilfields. They do still have some refineries in the KSA, but those represent a small percentage of the total assets of those companies and have for a long time. They could afford to lose them and life would go on, their stock prices shouldn’t even drop by 10%, let alone any meaningful impact to the US economy as a whole. US oil services companies are also active in Saudi, but by definition they don’t own the assets.

        But do we really need to get involved to keep the oil flowing and shipping? The local players will do what they can to produce and ship their own oil, regardless of who’s in charge — democrat, theocrat, monarch. Even if you have some attacks like what’s going on now between Iran and KSA, the natural response is tit-for-tat until a rational solution is reached.

        The one doomsday scenario is basically something like the Iran-Iraq War — two nations engage in a protracted war near oilfields that keeps a lot of production out of commission for a long time. Our own invasion of Iraq sort of had this effect also, as did Desert Storm. So if our main concern in the Mideast is oil, then the basis of US foreign policy there should be to prevent scenarios like Iran-Iraq or the US invasion of Iraq. This basically means an explicit guarantee that we will come down on anyone with overwhelming force if they launch a major attack against a neighbor. But there’s no reason we need to be aligned with KSA against Iran or vice-versa.

        Wency

        October 11, 2019 at EDT am

      • Finally a commenter who read what I wrote.

        It’s true, the Saudis nationalized Aramco and the “am” part of the word is now obsolete, but US companies have all sorts of investment in Gulf infrastructure. Please be rational.

        The US is the imperial power keeping the Gulf oil flowing. Trump is gonna change that.

        “But we don’t need their oil anymore…”

        Sigh. This is SO stupid.

        “t is one of the largest companies in the world by revenue, and according to accounts seen by Bloomberg News, the most profitable company in the world.[7] Saudi Aramco has both the world’s second-largest proven crude oil reserves, at more than 270 billion barrels (4.3×1010 m3),[8] and second-largest daily oil production.[9]”

        Fracking in the US is fraught with political problems. The money has already been sunk into the Gulf infrastructure.

        “So if our main concern in the Mideast is oil, then the basis of US foreign policy there should be to prevent scenarios like Iran-Iraq or the US invasion of Iraq.”

        Gee, ya think?

        “But there’s no reason we need to be aligned with KSA against Iran or vice-versa.”

        In an ideal world we shouldn’t be “aligned” with anyone but we don’t live in an ideal world, we live in the real world with real people. And real people have alliances.

        gothamette

        October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Edits:

        “The US is the imperial power keeping the Gulf oil flowing. Trump is NOT gonna change that.”

        “But we don’t need their oil anymore…”

        I didn’t mean to attribute that to Wency. I was mimicking the usual alt-right computer jockey bullshit.

        gothamette

        October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “I realize we had been developing oil interests in the Middle East long before Kissinger. And I’m also aware of British mishandling of the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. ”

        You wrote: “I don’t like Trump at all, but I heartily agree with his remark that America’s greatest mistake was to involve ourselves in the Middle East. We should blame Kissinger for that. ”

        No further comment.

        “All I’m saying is that we should have steered as clear of politics as we possibly could have and done nothing to antagonize the keepers of the black gold.”

        That is impossible. The keepers of the black gold are people and people mean politics and politics means you kiss up. But in fact we did steer clear of politics as far as humanly possible. We did a good job handling the Saudis for a long time, even though our support of Israel disgusted them.

        “And there’s no need for ad hominem abuse of my supposed “little brain”.”

        I apologize, but when I hear people spinning fantasies about how we can do this:

        “”THAT’s what I meant by staying out of the Middle East – I meant its politics. Let the “policeman powers” be the responsibility of the United Nations as it should have been and let our corporate money speak for us rather than our guns and our blood and our planes. Maybe we chose the strategy we did initially for the sake of the oil, but it was the wrong choice to get as involved as we did. Neutrality was in our best interest. ”

        I have to shake my head and wonder what’s going on in there.

        gothamette

        October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Nothing you wrote is relevant to what I actually wrote. You just wrote a lot of shit to show off.”

        Oooh. Neocon, much?

        I have to say, for someone I took to be a pretty astute commenter, i’m surprised.

        gda53

        October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

  22. lion==faux populist

    rapping boomer

    October 10, 2019 at EDT am

    • Lion has always been a snob—he never pretended to be a populist.

      Gozo

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • What Lion are you talking about?

      The Lion who blogs here despises people.

      njguy73

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  23. Fox is now saying that 51% want Trump “removed.” But I got that on Drudge so make of that what you will.

    I find it hard to believe.

    gothamette

    October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I make of it that Drudge has gone anti-Trump.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Drudge was citing Fox. Is Fox anti-Trump?

        gothamette

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Fox has several pro-Trump talk-show hosts.

        The rest of Fox is definitely not pro-Trump.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Drudge has been sold. I believe to Google or one of their subsidiaries.

        This is why they are now relentlessly anti-Trump.

        gda53

        October 11, 2019 at EDT am

    • Check out how that poll is constructed. 48% Dem. So they found 3% of the remainder to get 51%.
      And the Fox poll guy is a ‘progressive’ & definitely not trustworthy. They will say and do ANYTHING.

      Trump has 95% approval yet they are saying 15% of GOP want to impeach him? Please.

      Just another fake poll to gee up the faux impeachment mania.

      They are frantic to tar Trump, Barr & Durham as much as possible. IG Report next week and Durham will be giving an interim report shortly as well. The fear is palpable in DC.

      gda53

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I would guess that the MSM will be citing polls only in print from here on out. To do so on camera would likely reveal significant blushing on the part of the journalist.

      Fox is anti-Trump at its core, which became obvious in the 2016 election season. A few branches are nominally pro-Trump.

      Mike

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  24. Tucker Carlson defense was extremely stupid : people don’t know where the Kurds are nor who they are . It’s a disgrace.

    Bruno

    October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I look at it as yet another example of how the MM has brainwashed us into believing we ‘owe’ the Kurds for “helping” us.

      Be assured that the Kurds did nothing out of their love for us or from the goodness of their heart. Everything they did was in aid of their own interests.

      We were the ones who gave them arms and military assistance to defeat a common enemy – but one that lived in their backyard, not ours.

      They are the ones who owe us, thank you very much.

      Now we have accomplished what we came to do and we are leaving, as promised. Go sort out your own differences with your neighbour Turkey and don’t expect us to carry your water and provide cover for your communist rebels. We are not going to help form a Kurdish State.

      Sorry, but that is the brutal truth.

      Call us next time we have mutual interests.

      gda53

      October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  25. Tribalism in the Middle East is on another level. Not to say that Meriprolestan is fun n games, when it comes to eliminating people who are deemed outsiders. Anglo Saxon society is just more polite when it creates legacies that keep Eastern Asiatics away from power and a fortified police state that keeps NAMs from rebelling.

    Ok, what, who's this again?

    October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Tribalism is intense in the Middle East, and Anglo Saxon society is very polite. Everything else you wrote is wrong and stupid.

      Lowe

      October 11, 2019 at EDT pm

  26. Its a reasonable hypothesis on observation, but the Kurds aren’t going to be slaughtered.

    The US Military Brass takes historical tribalism well into account, and therefore so does Trump. The Kurds are the most important people in the entire region in that regard, broadly anchoring the original genetics of their all-important region after the Turk-Arab invasions. Meaning that the original mountain-dwelling tribe of the region has never abandoned it (possession being said to be up to 99% of real estate ownership).

    The Kurds are very important. If anything, I would assume this move to be a type of trap for the Turks.

    Mike

    October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  27. The militant Kurds have always been viewed as terrorists. Their terrorism against their own country helped to create ISIS. They need to learn to be good Syrians.

    Frank M Hurdle

    October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “The militant Kurds have always been viewed as terrorists. Their terrorism against their own country helped to create ISIS. They need to learn to be good Syrians”

      1. Currently, the Kurds don’t have a country.

      2. The Kurds aren’t able to create an Isis (the organization who prided themselves on raping Kurdish women). To state otherwise is propaganda. Isis is an animal that was fed what caused it to grow (money, arms, political room, etc) by large States. Nothing about it was nor could have been so organic as to be a side effect of intranational ethnic conflict.

      3. The Kurds have always been viewed as terrorists by whom? Turks and Arabs? Who gives fuck all what those long-time mortal enemies of ours (and the real long-time terrorists) say or think? It couldn’t matter less. They have no future. Let that unavoidable reality sink in.

      4. As far as Kurds being good citizens is concerned, don’t you mean that they should be good Turkish citizens? Or Iraqi citizens? The reality is that the Kurds are their own nation. That won’t change. They will either be eradicated, which won’t happen under the West’s watch, or the nations that sit on top of them will be (in progress).

      Mike

      October 11, 2019 at EDT am

  28. If the Democrats in the House want to save the Kurds they can vote for a war resolution, and declare war on Turkey. Otherwise they can Kiss my A**. Trump is evil because he will not sit on the horns on Nancy’s false dilemma.

    Josephbleau

    October 10, 2019 at EDT pm

  29. […] I predicted two weeks ago that the Kurd-Turkey-Syria fiasco would be Trump’s undoing. At a time when Trump needs Mitch McConnell to prevent him from being voted out of office, Trump has given him a strong reason to wish that Trump would be replaced by President Pence. […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: