Trump launches missiles against Syria; more false flags planned?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, August 30, 2026 16:39
VIEWED: 18393
PAGE 7 of 15

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I like Stefan. I haven't bought into anarchy yet, and I don't imagine I will anytime soon, but I do agree with some of the points he brings up a lot like the non-aggression principal and I am a fan of much smaller government in general.

I haven't watched this one yet. I'll get back to you.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Firing 59 Tomahawks cost almost $100 million dollars. I coulda been set-for-life with just a tiny fraction of that. What a gorram waste.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-firing-59-tomahawk-missiles-035600
272.html

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Sig,

Yes, alas, I had that thought. If that's true, then yes, the media nonsense faucet will now turn off.

I heard that "Became president last night" after his speech also, so that might be deep state bait. We'll see.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I watched it, and the one he made on the 6th. (Well I listened to it while working on one of my projects. I don't really care to stare somebody in the face who isn't really there while they talk at me for 30 minutes).

Seems I wasn't that far off the mark when I was talking about the MSM and using Bana, the 7 year old girl who was telling the world who was responsible for the attacks to start another war.

I recommend everybody just STFU for a couple of days and see what happens and use that time to do some deep thinking about exactly what it is you want and what it is you're fighting against. I really don't think it's each other.

I may be wrong, but I think they just tried to flip the script on us again. The Democrats were the party against war for many decades until the Post GWB world. Obama was President in a time where the Democrats were in wars every day he was in office. This almost seems like they played us and handed those keys to the war machine over to Trump now, all the while we're still fighting like cats and dogs, but even worse now since we're just confused as fuck about all of this.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

I like Stefan.

---

Mmmm... can't say that I feel the same. People (THGUR, GSTRING, others) tend to assume that because somebody posts one thing from one source they agree with everything from that source ... What are they- children? They can't distinguish between various discrete opinions of an individual, and the individual him/herself? So let me be clear- I don't agree with everything Stefan says.

Quote:

---

I haven't bought into anarchy yet, and I don't imagine I will anytime soon, but I do agree with some of the points he brings up a lot like the non-aggression principal and I am a fan of much smaller government in general.

---

Then we're on the same page.

Stefan in this case expressed my response to the USA missile attack on Syria with the same anger that I feel.

In my opinion, it's a terrible mistake, and an expression of the same war-mongering hubris that got us into the mess we're in.

As far as I can tell, this attack was just as phony as the "Assad gassed his own people in Ghouta" story. One telling point- for those who have not bothered to look into the evidence - is that the "rescuers" were handling the "victims" with bare hands.

If the CW agent were really Sarin, the "rescuers" themselves would have been dead. That is an .incontrovertible. fact. Ergo, everyone who says it was "sarin" is lying or mistaken.

So, shooting missiles at somebody who probably wasn't the perpetrator. There are a few reasons why that might happen, and none of them good:

Trump was overtaken by emotion. I guess I shouldn't have to explain why that's bad.

Trump was fooled by his intelligence staff. I shouldn't have to explain that that's a problem both on the spook side and the Presidential side.

Trump decided to sacrifice a few Syrians and his ability to work with Russia in the future to get the neocons/ deep state/ complicit press off his back. Well, strategically that was another mistake, and ethically corrupt.

The deep state directly threatened Trump or his family. Well, I was hoping that Trump was made of sterner stuff. You shouldn't go into that job without knowing the risks involved. The last President who threatened to take on the deep state was assassinated.

Trump was a warmonger and deep-stater all along, and doesn't represent any different policy than Hillary.

====

My impression, and it's just my impression, is that the deep state applies tremendous pressure that WE can't see. Many events in foreign policy seemed to come as a surprise to Obama, and I think Trump is being bent to the MIC/ deep state/ globalist will too. (The Clintons were always on-board.)





----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Trump’s ‘Wag the Dog’ Moment

Just two days after news broke of an alleged poison-gas attack in northern Syria, President Trump brushed aside advice from some U.S. intelligence analysts doubting the Syrian regime’s guilt and launched a lethal retaliatory missile strike against a Syrian airfield.

Trump immediately won plaudits from Official Washington, especially from neoconservatives who have been trying to wrestle control of his foreign policy away from his nationalist and personal advisers since the days after his surprise victory on Nov. 8.

There is also an internal dispute over the intelligence. On Thursday night, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a “high degree of confidence” that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province.

But a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid.

One intelligence source told me that the most likely scenario was a staged event by the rebels intended to force Trump to reverse a policy, announced only days earlier, that the U.S. government would no longer seek “regime change” in Syria and would focus on attacking the common enemy, Islamic terror groups that represent the core of the rebel forces.

The source said the Trump national security team split between the President’s close personal advisers, such as nationalist firebrand Steve Bannon and son-in-law Jared Kushner, on one side and old-line neocons who have regrouped under National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, an Army general who was a protégé of neocon favorite Gen. David Petraeus.

In this telling, the earlier ouster of retired Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser and this week’s removal of Bannon from the National Security Council were key steps in the reassertion of neocon influence inside the Trump presidency. The strange personalities and ideological extremism of Flynn and Bannon made their ousters easier, but they were obstacles that the neocons wanted removed.

Though Bannon and Kushner are often presented as rivals, the source said, they shared the belief that Trump should tell the truth about Syria, revealing the Obama administration’s CIA analysis that a fatal sarin gas attack in 2013 was a “false-flag” operation intended to sucker President Obama into fully joining the Syrian war on the side of the rebels — and the intelligence analysts’ similar beliefs about Tuesday’s incident.

Instead, Trump went along with the idea of embracing the initial rush to judgment blaming Assad for the Idlib poison-gas event. The source added that Trump saw Thursday night’s missile assault as a way to change the conversation in Washington, where his administration has been under fierce attack from Democrats claiming that his election resulted from a Russian covert operation.

If changing the narrative was Trump’s goal, it achieved some initial success with several of Trump’s fiercest neocon critics, such as neocon Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, praising the missile strike, as did Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

---

McStain ... what a storm-crow. Wherever he goes, death and destruction follow in a few weeks. But when all of those assholes line up on your side... maybe you should change sides.

Quote:

---

The neocons and Israel have long sought “regime change” in Damascus even if the ouster of Assad might lead to a victory by Islamic extremists associated with Al Qaeda and/or the Islamic State.

Trump employing a “wag the dog” strategy, in which he highlights his leadership on an international crisis to divert attention from domestic political problems, is reminiscent of President Bill Clinton’s decision to attack Serbia in 1999 as impeachment clouds were building a

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME