Humint Events Online: Trump and the Media Have a Wargasm Over Syria Strike

Sunday, April 09, 2017

Trump and the Media Have a Wargasm Over Syria Strike

Trump of course is a very unpopular president, record low approval for this early stage, and there are questions about his competency, mental stability and improper ties to Russia, among other problems this very unqualified president has.

So what better than to start a new war, or take military action, to goose up those approval ratings?  Of course the military LOVES war especially corporate cable TV news (mother fucking blood suckers-- isn't their a law against war profiteering?).

And better yet-- attack Syria, an ally of Russia, which should dispel some worries about Trump's ties to Russia and Putin. Also, attack on "humanitarian grounds", which will win over some squishy liberal pundits, and make Trump seem like he cares (when he obviously doesn't).

It also did something Obama didn't do, bomb Syria after the 2013 attack, despite the fact the GOP then was quite against such military action (as was I).

So some 59 cruise missiles were shot at a military airbase, at a tune of about $90 million bucks (a pittance for the US military of course).

Never mind that the air strip was functional less than 24 hours later and then used to bomb more Syrians. Never mind that to avoid causing a problem with Russia, the Russians were pre-warned and of course, they then warned Syria, so they could evacuate. All in all, the attack seems to be a sham. The evidence that Trump's completely ineffectual military strike on Syria was just an empty political gesture is overwhelming.

But the media goosing was accomplished, and it was a great diversion from other troubles the Trump administration has, especially the Russia ties and campaign collusion (treason) hearings. Also it distracted from the hugely important US-China summit that was going on at the same time as the strike and which was completely over-shadowed by the Syrian strike. For all his tough talk about China during the campaign, Trump basically was a pushover in the meeting with the Chinese, and it seems like not much was changed (even though Trump was furious previously with how the Chinese had "raped us"). Amusingly, the Chinese mocked Trump about the missile strike after they left the US.

Was it actually a ruse by the Russians? It seems plausible:
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell tonight opened his show positing that “if Vladimir Putin masterminded the last week in Syria, he has gotten everything he could have asked for.” He argued that it’s conceivable that Putin could have told Bashar al-Assad to carry out a small chemical attack “just big enough to attract media attention so that my friend in the White House will see it on TV” and then Trump can fire missiles that will “do no real damage” to ensure that the U.S. media will “change the subject from Russian influence” on the White House. O’Donnell said it certainly “changes the conventional wisdom” about the dynamic between Trump and Russia, “as long as you never, never question whether Vladimir Putin wanted all of this to happen this week.”

One thing for sure is that Trump's alt-right, conspiracy fan base is upset about the Syrian strike, saying he gave into the Neocons and he's just another US president controlled by Jews and globalists and the military-industrial complex. To which I say, no shit. It was the stupidest kind of wishful thinking to think Trump would be any sort of "peace" or "truth" president, instead of the clueless arrogant asshole he is, who is easily swayed by whatever he sees on TV and whoever plays to his ego.

And not shockingly either, attacks on ISIS in Syria are now down.

Also, worth mentioning that during the campaign, there were HUGE fears about Hillary starting WWIII by pissing off the Russians by going into Syria. I'd say those fears are quite a bit bigger with respect to the unstable Trump taking military action in Syria.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger