International News
See other International News Articles
Title: Pat Buchanan: Syria Could Consume Trump’s Presidency
Source:
Lifezette
URL Source: http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/ ... ria-consume-trumps-presidency/
Published: Apr 10, 2017
Author: Kathryn Blackhurst
Post Date: 2017-04-10 12:52:31 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 2723
Comments: 28
Conservative political commentator Pat Buchanan said a U.S. commitment to the ouster of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and an increased troop presence on the ground would risk pulling the nation into four simultaneous wars, during an interview Monday on “The Laura Ingraham Show.” Buchanan, a former senior adviser to President Reagan, urged President Donald Trump and his administration to exercise the utmost caution in discerning how to move forward on Syria. If Trump continues along the path of major intervention in the Syrian conflict, Buchanan warned of terrible consequences. “If you try to overthrow Assad, then you will be — the Russians will fight, the Iranians will fight, Hezbollah will fight, obviously Assad and his army and their force will fight,” Buchanan said. “We’ll be fighting all four of them, as well as ISIS and Al-Qaeda and Syria. Now you tell me how we win that war and who we put into power after we defeated all six of them?” Buchanan noted that several neoconservative U.S. senators — including John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and even Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — expressed varying degrees of glee and support for further U.S. intervention in Syria. Over the weekend, Sen. Graham even went so far as to call for thousands more U.S. troops on the ground in Syria. “Well, that’s McCain and Graham and Marco Rubio — the War Party,” Buchanan said. “But let me say this, Laura — my view is they’re not going to get the war they want. If Donald Trump, the president, takes us into Syria’s civil war — and he’s already made the first strike — it will consume his presidency.” http://www.lifezette.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/041017-PAT-BUCHANAN.mp3 “So I think that the War Party is going to be frustrated because I cannot believe that Donald Trump on second thought is going to plunge us into Syria, which he told us again and again and again would be an act of folly — that our enemy is ISIS, that our enemy is Al-Qaeda,” Buchanan added. “And we should finish them off.” Ingraham agreed, saying, “There’s just a number of these people — like Graham, McCain, Rubio, Cory Gardner (R-Colo.)— they are not happy unless America is on the verge of sending like 50,000 troops to the Middle East. I mean, they’re just itching for war with Russia. I’ve never seen anything like this.” What’s more, Buchanan noted that if Trump ultimately decides to increase U.S. intervention in Syria, he risks losing the base that elected him in the first place. “And the populists and nationalists out there who feel that their voice — they put out a tremendous amount to put Donald Trump in power,” Buchanan said. “And frankly, if Donald Trump marches us into Syria, he will begin to lose these folks. Their main issues are trade, immigration, and American-first.” But those key issues, Buchanan said, are not the priorities of some of the people Trump has placed around himself in the White House. “Those aren’t the views of Mr. [Gary] Cohn of Goldman Sachs,” Buchanan said, referring to one of Trump’s advisers. “And if that becomes the adopted policy of the Trump White House, it won’t be too long before those people will depart.” Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, reportedly has been engaging in squabbles with chief strategist Stephen Bannon. Reports even circulated last week speculating that Bannon could be on his way out of the White House. While Kushner adheres to a traditional, establishment worldview, Bannon represents the populist-conservative base that rallied behind Trump and propelled him to the presidency. "There's no doubt that Donald Trump is of course enormously supportive of his daughter, and I think he's enormously supportive of and protective of his son-in-law. That's a fight you cannot win," Buchanan admitted. "But I will say this — if they succeed in getting Mr. Bannon and Mr. Bannon has to leave, the shield will be removed from Jared Kushner." And if that shield is removed, Buchanan warned that the populists will bail on Trump and his remaining administration members. And if Trump engages much further with Syria, his base could retreat even further. "I think that Trump — I mean, they have to have a second look at this and say, 'Do we really want to start down this road?' Because we all know where this ends," Buchanan said. "And it is obvious where it ends, and that is America inside the Syrian civil war sending in more and more troops." "And if Trump sees where they're going, then I believe you cannot be blind to seeing where this ends if we keep this up," Buchanan added. "I think he will pull back."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tooconservative (#0)
I agree with Pat. Going to war with Syria would be folly. But Trump didn't go to war with Syria. The Syrians mass-murdered children with Sarin gas. And so Trump destroyed a squadron of aircraft and their facilities at the airbase from which the attack was launched - and that's it. He did not call for war. He did not call for more. He did not order additional strikes. He told Assad that he was being bombed for having attacked children. Now, there are two reasonable things to do here: (1) Take Trump at his word - that that's why he attacked, that's why he attacked where he attacked, and that the message he wanted to send was: never do that again. (2) Don't do it again. That's it. That's all. Warmongers want an escalation they won't get. Russia haters want this to be the moment of utter break with Russia. It's not that. Trump showed Assad (and Russia) that we WILL attack if they gas people. Period. Russia can't stop us. Syria can't. And there is so much at stake for them, that means: NEVER USE GAS. So they won't. It's as simple as that.
The audio player for the podcast with Ingraham and Buchanan got mashed in the article. http://www.lifezette.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/041017-PAT-BUCHANAN.mp3
I think the S-300 could stop a squadron of Tomahawks. Russia chose not to use it. To stop 60 Tomahawks might take two separate S-300 units. Depending on which version of the S-300 is in Syria, each radar/control unit can likely target and launch multiple missiles against aircraft (including cruise missiles). However, most types of S-300 (specs) are limited to 4 or 6 simultaneous targets. They have one version that is said to control 36 anti-air missiles at once but that sounds dicey to me. Again, I don't know which ones are in Syria. I wouldn't bet that Russia would not shoot with the S-300 if we attack again. Our military has been hollowed out by 0bama, largely due to continued acquisitions for the F-35 while keeping inside the sequestration limits. The real question is whether we will be able to fly within range of existing S-300 ground installations in Syria. We've never had any authorization or legal authority or support of the U.N. for doing that to begin with. As long as we attacked ISIS, Assad and Putin didn't care since it played into their hands and let them concentrate on other rebel groups.
Well, if the Syrians use Sarin again, we'll get to test our theories. I say that if they do, we will strike again, heavily, against a suitable target, and that the Russians will not intervene to shoot down US missiles. Certainly they won't shoot down US aircraft. You say that they will. I also say that the first strike we did will effectively deter it from happening again, so we'll never get to test our theories. Trump sent the message, and it will effectively modify Syrian behavior for the remainder of the conflict.
According to you and dupes like you selling propaganda supporting an islamic caliphate in Syria.
Dupes, huh? I see. So, you work for a national intelligence agency have access to secret information that makes you better informed than the rest of us? Supporting an Islamic Caliphate? Me? You are a silly person. I want to see the terrorists utterly destroyed. AND I want to see Assad hang for his crimes. See, I don't think we have to love Stalin in order to defeat Hitler. I understand that both sides of a fight can be bad.
They didn't. It was your jihadi friends. False flag Sir.
I suspect they tested one unit. That is why only part of Tomahawks got through.
They did not use S-400 yet.
Moderate terrorists have sarin.
I don't think they used S-300 yet. I'm not sure I've seen a reliable report that the S-400 is on the ground in Syria. You know how Russia is about letting those go anywhere outside Russia.
They didn't. It was your jihadi friends. False flag Sir. Congratulations, you broke the code.
No, but apparently you think you do.
Then Assad and Putin had better finish them off quickly, before they use it again.
Obviously not, because my argument is in the alternative: If Assad used the Sarin then he deserved the hit. If he didn't use the Sarin, he still deserved the hit, and now he and Russia have a strong incentive to deploy whatever forces they need to to end the war and stop the refugee flood.
Kerry/BarryO LIED...and CHILDREN DIED!! HOO cares?! NOT DemRATZ...MUD "Devolve Power Outta the Federal Leviathan and Back to the States, BTW, if someone from outside of Syria organized this Sarin attack, does he "deserve the hit"? Who should do the hit (depending on the guilty party)?
You are so thirsty for "justice". What if it will proven that moderate jihadist terrorists made this as false flag operation? Who should be punished for unjust killing of Syrian soldiers? Should YOU get the hit by a smart missile?
The Assads have been the brutal, bloodthirsty, murderous dictators of Syria for over 50 years. You want to just look at the one individual act, the Sarin gas attack, and if he didn't do that claim that he didn't deserve to be hit. Not true. Had there been no Sarin gas attack, he STILL deserved to be hit. The Sarin gas attack gave us a good reason to do it, but if it was a false flag, the US hit gives the Russians and Syrians a strong incentive to finish off ISIS quickly, so they can't do another false flag. Asking me to care about the operatives of the Syrian state getting killed is like asking me to feel sorry for the casualties of the Wehrmacht. Not happening. Thugs serving a bastard.
You are avoiding the answer. If neither Russians nor Syrians are responsible, then what about responsibility for the illegal attack on a sovereign state? And if you do not support Assad in his fight against Islamists, you are an enemy of the Christians. Are you by any chance a member of anti-Christian organization?
Molon Labe. It would be grand for the little countries if the USA could be simply constrained by some abstract concept of law that they get to decide. But in the real world the US is constrained by the law as it decides. If Trump did an evil act, I would worry about it. But hitting that Syrian airbase whence the poison gas attack originated, according to our intelligence, which we trust, was not an evil act, so I'm happy about it.
And if you do not support Hitler in his fight against international Communism, you are an enemy of Christians and free people. Failed logic. I choose Option C: the Americans decide.
Which Americans?
Perhaps trusting our intelligence community is an evil act.
Which Americans? Hillary, Obama, Kerry, et al.
White Helmets staged it. ========== [...] The Swedish NGO Doctors for Human Rights (SWEDHR) has accused the Syria Civil Defense, better known as the White Helmets, of falsifying information about its alleged work in Syria. According to the Swedish human rights activists, so-called "rescue" procedures captured in White Helmets videos had been staged; they were carried out on a dead child. [...] They behaved as war criminals when they used dead children for propaganda purposes when staging fake rescue attempts, Professor Marcello Ferrada de Noli wrote in the Indicter magazine. According to SWEDHR, which paid attention to "questionable" cases of chemical attacks in Aleppo, Syria, including the incident on Sarmin, Idlib, on April 15, 2015, medical rescue scenarios depicted in White Helmets videos had obviously been staged. Namely, no substance (e.g. adrenaline) was injected into the infant while the ‘medic' or doctor introduced the syringe-needle in a simulated intracardiac-injection maneuver, which was considered sufficient to raise a hypothesis that the child might in fact have died because of the injection procedure. While the While Helmets themselves attributed the infant deaths to chlorine gas, this was disputed by SWEDHR. Additionally, a UK doctor ventured that the deaths could instead be attributed to drug overdose, most likely opiates, the Indicter reported. However, SWEDHR stressed that it has never accused the White Helmets of "murdering children," nor has it directed similar accusations against the personnel showed in the video published by White Helmets. [...] "As outlandish as it may sound, it's quite likely that Islamist opposition forces in Syria are behind all of these events. Surprisingly specific and hard-to-deny visual clues suggest rebels are murdering the victims themselves using different methods, and lodging false claims as cover, to shift the blame," Adam Larson, an independent investigator in Spokane, Washington, wrote in the Indicter. [...] The so-called Syrian Civil Defense, commonly known as the White Helmets, was founded in Istanbul, Turkey, in 2013 by former British officer James Le Mesurier, who underwent training courses offered by the Turkish Search and Rescue Association. In the ensuing years, SCD grew to a full-fledged organization of some 3,000 volunteers operating from over a hundred local civil defense centers across Syria. SCD is supported by the aid agencies of a number of external donor governments, such as the UK Commonwealth Office, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and, most notably, the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The White Helmets claim to have rescued over 70,000 people, yet judging by its own imagery was found to have been rescuing the same "victims" at different occasions. Additionally, White Helmets members were found to take sides in the ongoing Syrian war, carry arms, sport Islamist imagery and defile the corpses of Syrian soldiers. Meanwhile, the process of glorification of the White Helmets goes on in the Western world. In 2016, the White Helmets received the Right Livelihood award, which is commonly called the "alternative Nobel Prize." In February 2017, an eponymous a 40-minute documentary about the White Helmets by director Orlando von Einsiedel won an Oscar for best documentary short feature, whereas celebrity actor George Clooney voiced plans of developing a feature version of the film. https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201704101052484101-sweden-syria-white-helmets/
Interesting if true. I'd like to know more about the NGO, its staff and disposition in Syria, its reputation for reliable reporting in a war zone. We need more evidence and more independent investigators. I still don't think we can be certain what happened even if I have started considering that Assad did launch a gas attack. No matter the facts, there is evidence on the ground and probably a certain number of independent Western sources on the ground in Syria, much as there has been in earlier attacks. I do find it very suspicious that only three corpses have been autopsied. And those were conducted by the Turks, certainly no honest brokers in this. Turkey will do almost anything to defeat Assad because Erdogan is dreaming of Greater Turkey, a neo-Ottoman fantasy of a return to greatness in the Mideast for Turkey.
Today's military ventues and conquest are won more by public relation campaigns than by attack by troops. The sequence of events is to start and fan an alternative to what really happened. While people are confused and arguing among themselves, you move in and take over with a small proportion of dedicated guerillas. Syria is a good example. The secular Assad has been attacked for years as a bad strongman and the jihadists are poised to move in and take over. Even our dumbass president has fallen for the deception.
#2. To: All (#0)
(Edited)
I'll try again. It appears the {AUDIO} tag isn't accepted here at LF.
Update: Damn. LF converts the AUDIO tag into a download link for the MP3 file. Anyway, I never knew about that before.
#3. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
Trump showed Assad (and Russia) that we WILL attack if they gas people. Period. Russia can't stop us. Syria can't.
#4. To: Tooconservative (#3)
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
The Syrians mass-murdered children with Sarin gas.
#6. To: rlk (#5)
According to you and dupes like you selling propaganda supporting an islamic caliphate in Syria.
#7. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
The Syrians mass-murdered children with Sarin gas.
#8. To: Tooconservative (#3)
To stop 60 Tomahawks might take two separate S-300 units.
#9. To: Tooconservative (#3)
The real question is whether we will be able to fly within range of existing S-300 ground installations in Syria.
#10. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Well, if the Syrians use Sarin again, we'll get to test our theories
#11. To: A Pole (#9)
They did not use S-400 yet.
#12. To: A Pole (#7)
The Syrians mass-murdered children with Sarin gas.
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#6)
So, you work for a national intelligence agency have access to secret information that makes you better informed than the rest of us?
#14. To: A Pole (#10)
#15. To: rlk (#13)
No, but apparently you think you do.
#16. To: A Pole (#7)
Localities, and Individuals as Prescribed in the US Constitution."
#17. To: Vicomte13 (#15)
If Assad used the Sarin then he deserved the hit.
#18. To: Vicomte13 (#15)
If Assad used the Sarin then he deserved the hit.
#19. To: A Pole (#18)
#20. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
(Edited)
but if it was a false flag, the US hit gives the Russians and Syrians a strong incentive to finish off ISIS quickly, so they can't do another false flag
#21. To: A Pole (#20)
(Edited)
#22. To: A Pole (#20)
And if you do not support Assad in his fight against Islamists, you are an enemy of the Christians.
#23. To: Vicomte13 (#22)
Failed logic. I choose Option C: the Americans decide.
#24. To: Vicomte13 (#21)
But hitting that Syrian airbase whence the poison gas attack originated, according to our intelligence, which we trust, was not an evil act, so I'm happy about it.
#25. To: A Pole (#23)
the Americans decide.
#26. To: rlk, Vicomte13, TooConservative, sneakypete, ConservingFreedom, Willie Green (#24)
#27. To: A Pole (#26)
(Edited)
The Swedish NGO Doctors for Human Rights (SWEDHR) has accused
"As outlandish as it may sound, it's quite likely that Islamist opposition forces in Syria are behind all of these events. Surprisingly specific and hard-to-deny visual clues suggest rebels are murdering the victims themselves using different methods, and lodging false claims as cover, to shift the blame," Adam Larson, an independent investigator in Spokane, Washington, wrote in the Indicter.
#28. To: A Pole (#26)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]