Trump: Acquiring plunder is what he thinks U.S. foreign policy is for.

[JK/SEA]

I am finally glad we agree on something. I am actually WAY too smart for you. But that's not much considering you are a Trump supporter and Trump supporters aren't all that bright to begin with.

As for plundering Iraq, you are sounding more and more like a neo-con every day. Claim to be against the neo-cons yet talk and support the same things they do. I guess that's the Trump effect. If you are gonna support an authoritarian, might as well go full retard!!

ironically, Bill Kristol agrees with you...

 

[Danke]

James is a great American.

RJB is a great American.

 

[Danke]

Was that election held on Halloween?

Those are beekeepers.

 

[RJB]

RJB is a great American.

Danke is alright.

 

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Going in with overwhelming force and seizing the resources makes a lot more sense than a waging a flaccid war ran by lawyers and spending years and years nation-building. That's the difference between a Carlylean Great Man like Caesar Augustus and a fool like George W. Bush.

 

[RJB]

Those are beekeepers.

That's great that we brought them agricultural freedom, but I am not interested in those honeypots.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Almost no body finds his plunder rhetoric practical or credible... but his argument does serve a purpose and point out the sheer stupidity of costly deadly "freedom spreader" wars that have cost Americans trillions of dollars in treasure and millions of lives & limbs in blood.

If his plunder doctrine was deemed real, he would be the preferred candidate for Wall Street lobbies, Goldman Sachs of the world, MIC, War profiteers etc. and not this overheating puppet:

 

[LibertyEagle]

I am finally glad we agree on something. I am actually WAY too smart for you. But that's not much considering you are a Trump supporter and Trump supporters aren't all that bright to begin with.

As for plundering Iraq, you are sounding more and more like a neo-con every day. Claim to be against the neo-cons yet talk and support the same things they do. I guess that's the Trump effect. If you are gonna support an authoritarian, might as well go full retard!!

Is that the best you can come back at me with? Pitiful. lol

 

[Dr.3D]

Oh for goodness' sake, I'll be glad when it's the 9th of November.

 

[Ender]

Of for goodness' sake, I'll be glad when it's the 9th of November.

I'm with ya.

 

[Ender]

Going in with overwhelming force and seizing the resources makes a lot more sense than a waging a flaccid war ran by lawyers and spending years and years nation-building. That's the difference between a Carlylean Great Man like Caesar Augustus and a fool like George W. Bush.

Bush WAS after resources- that's why he attacked Iraq in the first place. Had nothing to do with spreading democracy.

 

[nikcers]

Bush WAS after resources- that's why he attacked Iraq in the first place. Had nothing to do with spreading democracy.

Iraq was not over taking resources but control over the price of resources. Which is different, Bush's Iraq was mission accomplished. Trump in comparison would want to literally take the resources and give it to allies like Israel or sell it to our allies like Europe so they don't have to buy Oil from Russia.

 

[Danke]

Bush WAS after resources- that's why he attacked Iraq in the first place. Had nothing to do with spreading democracy.

Iraq before Desert Storm had the fourth largest military in the world. I think it was more influence from Israel that led us to destroy their military. Iraq was a threat to Israel. But, We (U.N. coalition ) didn't finish the job, so we had to go back and create the chaos in the Middle East for, guess what, Israel. Plus any country that does not trade oil in Our Petrodollars will be taken out, just look at Libya and now Syria and eventually Iran. Why is North Korea considered such a threat, no IMF central bank?

Israel is expansionary, they want more and more land. Now, it is just portions of Syria. But their goal goes beyond that.

We have plenty of our own resources, and can trade for whatever we lack. It is the threat to our monetary system (dominance) that drives wars.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Bush WAS after resources- that's why he attacked Iraq in the first place. Had nothing to do with spreading democracy.

If this is true, Trump's main sin then is he is verbalizing in plain words an existing policy that Bush started, Hillary supported completely and Obama has been carrying on reluctantly.


In that case, thank you Mr. Trump for being so honest. Quite refreshing for a change.

 

[nikcers]

If this is true, Trump's main sin then is he is verbalizing in plain words an existing policy that Bush started, Hillary supported completely and Obama has been carrying on reluctantly.


In that case, thank you Mr. Trump for being so honest. Quite refreshing for a change.

No, Trump's main sin is supporting existing policy that Bush started, Hillary supported completely and Obama has been carrying on reluctantly. This is what we've been saying for a year now, Trump is a neocon.

 

[oyarde]

The govt knows little of plunder , they just squander resources and get nothing but negatives in return .

 

[Ender]

Iraq was not over taking resources but control over the price of resources. Which is different, Bush's Iraq was mission accomplished. Trump in comparison would want to literally take the resources and give it to allies like Israel or sell it to our allies like Europe so they don't have to buy Oil from Russia.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-oil-juhasz/

Oil was not the only goal of the Iraq War, but it was certainly the central one, as top U.S. military and political figures have attested to in the years following the invasion.

"Of course it's about oil; we can't really deny that," said Gen. John Abizaid, former head of U.S. Central Command and Military Operations in Iraq, in 2007. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan agreed, writing in his memoir, "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil." Then-Sen. and now Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the same in 2007: "People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are."

For the first time in about 30 years, Western oil companies are exploring for and producing oil in Iraq from some of the world's largest oil fields and reaping enormous profit. And while the U.S. has also maintained a fairly consistent level of Iraq oil imports since the invasion, the benefits are not finding their way through Iraq's economy or society.

These outcomes were by design, the result of a decade of U.S. government and oil company pressure. In 1998, Kenneth Derr, then CEO of Chevron, said, "Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas-reserves I'd love Chevron to have access to." Today it does.

Same reason we helped overthrow Iran in 1953 and still want to strangle it today.

 

[Ender]

No, Trump's main sin is supporting existing policy that Bush started, Hillary supported completely and Obama has been carrying on reluctantly. This is what we've been saying for a year now, Trump is a neocon.

Yep.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

No, Trump's main sin is supporting existing policy that Bush started, Hillary supported completely and Obama has been carrying on reluctantly. This is what we've been saying for a year now, Trump is a neocon.

Going solely by pre-election campaign rhetoric, Obama would then be an "anti war Nobel Peace prize winner" pacifist. I'm sure you don't really believe that.

Just cuz he pretends at times to be something does not mean he actually is something.

Louis Farakhan has done interesting analysis on Obama and Trump.

 

[nikcers]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-oil-juhasz/

Same reason we helped overthrow Iran in 1953 and still want to strangle it today.

Oil regimes don't agree with us. We have all the oil we need, we want to control the price of oil.