XPost: soc.culture.china, soc.culture.usa, soc.culture.iraq   
   XPost: soc.culture.syria, soc.culture.pakistan, soc.culture.african   
   XPost: rec.sport.tennis   
   From: acoustic@panix.com   
      
   In article <874mfelq7c.fsf@wintersun.localdomain>,   
   jdeluise   wrote:   
   >acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn) writes:   
   >   
   >   
   >> My understanding of his words, in the context of all that he has said   
   >> about the new millennial American foreign policy, is that he would   
   >> first bomb the oil facilities under ISIS control ... and then, send in   
   >> members of the US Marine Corps to secure the perimeter of such a   
   >> facility.   
   >   
   >I fail to see much of a difference.  "secure the perimeter of such a   
   >facility" is the easy part.  To reach his stated goal of "taking the oil   
   >for our country" would require securing supply lines,   
   >ie. protecting/patrolling pipelines, supply routes into cities, securing   
   >ports and vessels to export the oil from the country.  These are not   
   >things that are easily accomplished, I guarantee the type of "boots on   
   >the ground" you envision he means would lead to the same type of   
   >violence and domination you claim to rail against.   
      
   I see your point of view.  But my interpretation is that he simply   
   won't do what you've just outlined.  He would explain his position,   
   when pressed, thus:   
     "Taking the oil for our country?  It would drain our treasury too   
      much.  George W Bush and Barack Obama have burned a big hole in our   
     treasury.  We're trillions of dollars in the hole and our country is   
     currently badly in disrepair.  We don't even have money for NASA and   
     all its wonderful projects any more.  And that's because my   
     predecessors have engaged our countries in regime change that   
     necessarily obliges us to fight an endless war on terrorism.   
      
     "Our primary goal is to make America great again.   
      
     "To that end, we need to just cut off the finance to ISIS and other   
      groups that are trying to hurt us.  Without the financing,   
      terrorism will just wither.  Actually, my administration has been   
      engaging secret negotiations with all relevant parties to make the   
      world safe to live in again.  I can't tell you too much because   
      we're still in delicate negotiations.  But I can tell you that I am   
      telling Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other Gulf states that they should   
      cease and desist trying to fund terrorist groups in order to pick a   
      fight with their neighbors and nurture more terrorism.   
      
     "And remember the Death Band which was performing in Paris in 2015   
      where scores died from terrorist attacks.  What the press didn't   
      mention much - for whatever the reasons they had - was that none of   
      the members of the band were hurt.  And it turned out that the   
      reason they weren't hurt, even though the terrorists were on that   
      same stage where they were performing is because the ISIS central   
      command made explicit instruction to the attackers not to hurt the   
      Americans - it was for ISIS a lesson for France for their decision   
      to bomb their oil facility.   
      
     "So, my advisers and I have decided that enough is enough.  We have   
      no intention to lord over you if you swear you will not send   
      suicide bombers to our cities and hurt our citizens.  I know what   
      you might be thinking.  You might still believe that they came and   
      took down our world trade center.  Well, the situation was more   
      complex than what you've been made aware of.  In that regard, I'm   
      asking the Attorney General to see if the Justice Department can   
      get those 28 pages of top-secret information made public as have   
      been requested by Senator Bob Graham of Florida and others have   
      worked on to be declassified.  In any case, the people of the   
      Middle East have suffered enough.  We need to take our warriors   
      home and leave the Middle East to the people to whom it belongs.   
      
     "I want America to be great again.  We can't do that if we continue   
      to make a lot of the people in the Middle East angry.  We have to   
      come home.  America, come home - and that's my message.  It's like   
      that prodigal son that Jesus talked about.  It's been long enough.   
      America needs to come home to rebuild itself and be great again.   
      
     "Thank you."   
      
   Now it may not be exactly like that.  But I know Trump, Trump is not a   
   deceptive person, like G W Bush or Hillary Clinton.  Trump may not get   
   there, especially given how much behind he is in terms of his ground   
   organization in Iowa.  But if he gets elected, he will be more like a   
   Reagan than the neocon-driven administrations we have seen.   
      
   >Clearly you've succumbed to Trump's erratic and arrogantly delivered   
   >rhetoric.  I feel sorry for you!   
      
   If it makes you feel more superior, go ahead.  But frankly, my message   
   is very focused.  I care about America and I support anyone who   
   genuinely wants to take America out of the viscious cycle of killing   
   and focus on rebuilding the country.  Go Trump or Paul.   
      
   But the point about picking your candidate is just to rank the bunch.   
   In that light, which candidate do you trust more to do what you want?   
      
   Based on the totality of Trump, Paul, Sanders, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio,   
   and Hillary Clinton have said, who do you trust more.   
      
   Easy!  The first three, yes.   But never the last three.   
      
   And then, among those you trust, who is most likely to win?  Trump!   
      
   So, it's that easy.   
      
   What Trump said about taking their oil is way less credible than his   
   repeated condemnation of George W Bush's invasion of Iraq and our   
   continuing occupation of Afghanistan - which makes absolutely no sense   
   other than to hold on to the sprawling Bagram base in Northeast   
   Afghanistan for god-know-what purpose.  Trump's aversion to military   
   adventure is much more palpable.  The media is largely beholden to the   
   neocons' agenda - which is also the State Department's and the   
   Pentagon's - agenda.  So, the frenzy of attacks against Trump by the   
   MSMS and the likes of John Kasich who wants to punch Putin in the   
   mouth if he gets to see him and Linsey Graham who just went with his   
   Bobbsey twin McCain to Iraq to deliver their "non-negotaible"   
   ultimatum of surrending Iraq's sovereignty simply convince me that the   
   attacks against Trump is simply malicious and serving the neocons!   
      
   lo yeeOn   
      
   P.S.:  Other people who support Trump ...   
     https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/3guykz/d   
   nald_trump_is_both_the_most_reasonable/   
      
     Donald Trump is both the most reasonable Republican Candidate, and   
     the one most likely to beat Hillary or whatever other Democrat, and   
     I'm a Sanders-supporting Democrat who thought Trump's candidacy was   
     a joke as of 3 weeks ago. (self.PoliticalDiscussion)   
     submitted 4 months ago * by tuna_HP   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)