Jump to content

Trump foreign policy


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, westside2 said:

Of course he does. Tibtard is willing to burn this country down if it meant getting rid of Trump. He is a enemy of the US.

Trump done stumbled his dumb ass into this very avoidable situation. 

 

Oh, those unforced errors sure do hurt. But there won’t be a war for bombing the stupid, sinister Saudis. Who’d go to war for them? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

It’s a global economy so the world really needs independence from oil, not just us. 

That’s what you want me to want. 

 

And no I do not. I actually wanted the Obama nuclear deal to keep going which was working. It worked so well that Trump was telling Iran to stay in the deal after he pulled out of it! <——— please read that last sentence again because it will be something you and all Trump supporters will forget almost immediately. 

You are the dumbest of the dumbasses. I suppose you think that everyone should be a net exporter of energy, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

That's not an answer. I was just curious as to what you deem Iran if the Saudis are "sinister". 

What’s your point

 

you do realize this is a Trump created crisis, right? He got all heavy on Iran and now the shooting has really started. 

 

I suspect thats why you are trying to make this about me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

What’s your point

 

you do realize this is a Trump created crisis, right? He got all heavy on Iran and now the shooting has really started. 

 

I suspect thats why you are trying to make this about me. 

 

Still not an answer. The point is to hear your opinion on Iran. If KSA is "sinister" to you, what is Iran?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Still not an answer. The point is to hear your opinion on Iran. If KSA is "sinister" to you, what is Iran?

 

I think what he’s saying is Iran was really cool and we had nothing to worry about with them because we had everything under control and.....TRUMP BAD!!! 

Edited by Chef Jim
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump: US 'locked and loaded depending on verification' of attack on Saudi oil field

 

"Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed!" Trump said.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/15/politics/trump-us-saudi-arabia-attack-iran-iraq/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ALF said:

Trump: US 'locked and loaded depending on verification' of attack on Saudi oil field

 

"Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed!" Trump said.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/15/politics/trump-us-saudi-arabia-attack-iran-iraq/index.html

Following the Kingdoms lead? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Still not an answer. The point is to hear your opinion on Iran. If KSA is "sinister" to you, what is Iran?

The regime Trump wanted to sit down with? The no preconditions to meeting the leaders? Lol, ok! 

 

Still no answer! ?

_____

 

Yemen’s Houthi rebels warn of more attacks on Saudi oil facilities

3DYIGMGYNYI6TLDDGALHCFKD7Y.jpg
 
The threat comes days after the group claimed an assault on a refinery belonging to Saudi Arabia’s national oil company. President Trump had said Sunday the United States was “locked and loaded” and ready to respond.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi drone attack not launched from Iraqi territory.

 

Kuwait is investigating accounts that a drone intruded into its airspace and flew over the royal palace on the same day the Saudi oil facilities were targeted.

 

Kuwait's Al-Rai newspaper said at dawn on Saturday, an unmanned drone about the size of a small car descended to a height of about 250 metres (820 feet) over the palace, before turning on its lights and flying away.

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/saudi-oil-attacks-latest-updates-190916102800973.html

 

That sounds way too sophisticated for Houthi rebels

Edited by ALF
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

Couldn't have said it better myself - you go, girl!

 

 

 

It would be interesting what her (and your) responses would have been had he gone in “guns a’blazing” before he had more information on who was responsible. 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

I also have animus against the Saudis

 

sept-11-new-york-twin-towers-gty-jc-1805

Time to invite the Taliban to Camp David! 

 

 

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/john-bolton-left-trump-hawkish-iran

Quote

 

ormer National Security Advisor John Bolton reportedly left the White House because he opposed President Donald Trump opting to soften his administration’s pressure campaign against Iran.

 

 

In an Axios report published on Saturday, an unnamed Bolton ally said that Bolton, an outspoken advocate for hawkish foreign policy measures, resigned after Trump told him in a meeting last week that he was considering lifting some sanctions on Iran.

After Bolton’s ouster, Trump told the press that he was considering talks with Iranian president Hassan Rouhani on Tehran’s nuclear program and the administration’s sanctions.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo admitted that there were “definitely” areas of disagreement with the ex-national security advisor, but declined to specify.

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't put it past the Saudis to attack their own property (with no casualties of course) to get the United States a little closer to striking Iran.  

 

IMO, al-Qaeda and ISIS are their Hezbollah-like creations when they need to get dirty.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Trump lashed out at the media for reporting he would meet with Iran with ‘no conditions.’ He’s said it on camera twice.

 

 

Trump lashed out at the media for reporting he would meet with Iran with ‘no conditions.’ He’s said as much on camera twice.

 

Add to list
President Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on Wednesday. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post) President Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on Wednesday. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
By 
September 16, 2019 at 7:34 a.m. EDT

President Trump lashed out Sunday night at the news media for reporting that he would meet with Iranian leaders with “no conditions” — something Trump has said on camera at least twice and that senior administration officials repeated to reporters just last week.

“The Fake News is saying that I am willing to meet with Iran, ‘No Conditions.’ That is an incorrect statement (as usual!),” Trump wrote to his more than 64 million Twitter followers.

The Fake News is saying that I am willing to meet with Iran, “No Conditions.” That is an incorrect statement (as usual!).

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2019

In fact, Trump said as much during a June 23 appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” after host Chuck Todd asked if he had a message to deliver to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, about his country’s potential development of a nuclear weapon.

“You can’t have a nuclear weapon. You want to talk? Good. Otherwise you can have a bad economy for the next three years,” Trump said.

 

“No preconditions?” Todd asked.

“Not as far as I’m concerned. No preconditions,” Trump replied.

WATCH: Trump tells Chuck Todd that he wants to talk with Iran with “no pre-conditions.” #MTP #IfItsSunday pic.twitter.com/kie0I91ZbA

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) June 23, 2019

That echoed Trump’s comments at a July 30, 2018, joint news conference at the White House during a visit by Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte.

Asked about a potential meeting with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Trump said: “I believe in meeting. I would certainly meet with Iran if they wanted to meet. I don’t know if they’re ready yet.”

“I’m ready to meet anytime they want to,” Trump added. “No preconditions. If they want to meet, we’ll meet.”

President Trump says a meeting with Iran’s President Rouhani could happen with “no preconditions.” Your thoughts? pic.twitter.com/VmJmP3fQv1

— FOX & friends (@foxandfriends) July 31, 2018

During a briefing at the White House on Tuesday, both Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed that Trump remained open to such talks.

“The president has made clear, he’s happy to take a meeting with no preconditions,” Mnuchin told reporters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dpberr said:

I don't put it past the Saudis to attack their own property (with no casualties of course) to get the United States a little closer to striking Iran.  

 

IMO, al-Qaeda and ISIS are their Hezbollah-like creations when they need to get dirty.  

 

 


My husband said the same thing about the Saudis.  I'm not convinced, but never-say-never.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, dpberr said:

I don't put it past the Saudis to attack their own property (with no casualties of course) to get the United States a little closer to striking Iran.  

 

IMO, al-Qaeda and ISIS are their Hezbollah-like creations when they need to get dirty.  

 

 

 

November 2017 saw the end of that. ISIS and AQ were funded by Bin Talal (and others, including Langley and the western ic) who were rounded up in the purge. 

 

KSA of 2019 is not anywhere close to the KSA of even late 2016. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

President Donald Trump’s statements on Twitter that the U.S. is “locked and loaded” to retaliate against those responsible for the attack on one of the world’s largest oil fields is adding to the dramatic climb in oil prices, market analysts said Monday.

U.S. benchmark oil prices were up nearly 10 percent to $60 a barrel Monday following Trump’s remark late Sunday and a weekend drone attack on Saudi Arabia’s massive oil facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais. The attack forced a production cut of more than half at one of the world’s largest oil fields, and Saudi Arabia has not yet said how long its facilities will remain down.

 

“The oil market is pricing in an additional security risk,” because of the attack, said Andy Lipow, head of oil market analyst firm Lipow Oil Associates. “I don’t think that security risk is going away. I think it’s going to increase, especially given the war of words going on now.”

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/16/donald-trump-oil-pices-1734085

 

Awesome 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Trump is irrelevant to this conversation. I asked you, since you call the Saudis "sinister" what YOU think of Iran. 

 

You won't answer. 

 

Because you're afraid to. (is the only conclusion one can draw).

What, you aren't going along with how nearly everyone else here sees him? In polls, he's been 98% pos, 99% dumb and 100% liar. I know he'll probably resent this and maybe get someone to help him with the math but it looks like he's a 297% dumb, lying pieceofshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Trump is irrelevant to this conversation. I asked you, since you call the Saudis "sinister" what YOU think of Iran. 

 

You won't answer. 

 

Because you're afraid to. (is the only conclusion one can draw).

Actually I am irrelevant to the Conversation. We are talking public policy. Trump f'd the bed here and you just want to change the subject. But I can roll with it. ?

 

Still no answer! 

7 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

"Trump Foreign Policy"

Seriously! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Actually I am irrelevant to the Conversation. We are talking public policy. Trump f'd the bed here and you just want to change the subject. But I can roll with it. ?

 

Still no answer!

 

The conversation is between you and me. It started yesterday with me being curious as to your position. Saying you're irrelevant to the conversation is not true. 

 

It's just amazing you won't even be honest enough to give an answer on a simple, on topic question. It's enough to make everyone think you're not a serious person worth considering their point. Most already hold that opinion, don't cement it for them.

 

But if you don't want to answer then we'll just go with you think Iran is wonderful. 

 

Which shows your ignorance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The conversation is between you and me. It started yesterday with me being curious as to your position. Saying you're irrelevant to the conversation is not true. 

 

It's just amazing you won't even be honest enough to give an answer on a simple, on topic question. It's enough to make everyone think you're not a serious person worth considering their point. Most already hold that opinion, don't cement it for them.

 

But if you don't want to answer then we'll just go with you think Iran is wonderful. 

 

Which shows your ignorance. 

Well, ok, I think the Iranian Regime is evil. 

 

But didn't I already say that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...