Trump -psykoosi

tulikomento kirjoitti:
Oliko tuossa erokirjeessä muuten vielä niin, että Mattis esitti henkilökohtaiset kiitoksensa USA:n asevoimien henkilöstölle, mutta ei Trumpille ?
Klikkaa laajentaaksesi...
Kyllä. Ei mitään kiitoksia Trumpille, ei myöskään hyvän tavan mukaista Yours respectfully tyyppistä litaniaa allekirjoituksen yläpuolella :uzi:
 
Kesäkuulta Foreign Policy. Ehkä USA ottaa nyt agressiivisemman linjan Iranin suhteen.

As the U.S. defense secretary drifts further from President Donald Trump’s inner circle, his mission gets clearer: preventing war with Tehran.

Most prominently, the administration’s new national security advisor, John Bolton, has long argued that the only way to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon is to force regime change on the country — by bombing it. He’s not alone. Since taking on his new job, Bolton has stripped the National Security Council of his predecessor’s more moderate advisors, replacing them with interventionist hard-liners, including Fred Fleitz, an ex-CIA analyst and a former employee at the uber-hawk and anti-Muslim activist Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. Fleitz, who is Bolton’s chief of staff, has long claimed that anything other than the adoption of “the Bolton plan” — scrapping the Iran deal and working for regime change — lacks “moral clarity.”

during the Barack Obama years, Mattis was asked to name the three top threats to American security, he gave a short but pointed answer: “Iran, Iran, Iran.” Nor has Mattis dropped his habit of describing Iran as a “malign influence” — a description he uses so commonly that it is identified with him.

But condemning Iran and pushing for a war with it are two different things.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/28/mattiss-last-stand-is-iran/

---


Tähän ei ole nyt mitään lähteitä, mutta sellainen tuntuma on tullut, että käytännössä molemmat puolueet ovat Iranin kurittamisen kannalla.

Ja niin olen minäkin. Iran on kuitenkin epävakauttanut tahallaan tilannetta Irakissa ja muualla. Turvapaikanhakijavirta Eurooppaan on pitkälti Iranin syytä.
 
ILoveEU kirjoitti:
Kesäkuulta Foreign Policy. Ehkä USA ottaa nyt agressiivisemman linjan Iranin suhteen.

As the U.S. defense secretary drifts further from President Donald Trump’s inner circle, his mission gets clearer: preventing war with Tehran.

Most prominently, the administration’s new national security advisor, John Bolton, has long argued that the only way to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon is to force regime change on the country — by bombing it. He’s not alone. Since taking on his new job, Bolton has stripped the National Security Council of his predecessor’s more moderate advisors, replacing them with interventionist hard-liners, including Fred Fleitz, an ex-CIA analyst and a former employee at the uber-hawk and anti-Muslim activist Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. Fleitz, who is Bolton’s chief of staff, has long claimed that anything other than the adoption of “the Bolton plan” — scrapping the Iran deal and working for regime change — lacks “moral clarity.”

during the Barack Obama years, Mattis was asked to name the three top threats to American security, he gave a short but pointed answer: “Iran, Iran, Iran.” Nor has Mattis dropped his habit of describing Iran as a “malign influence” — a description he uses so commonly that it is identified with him.

But condemning Iran and pushing for a war with it are two different things.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/28/mattiss-last-stand-is-iran/

---


Tähän ei ole nyt mitään lähteitä, mutta sellainen tuntuma on tullut, että käytännössä molemmat puolueet ovat Iranin kurittamisen kannalla.

Ja niin olen minäkin. Iran on kuitenkin epävakauttanut tahallaan tilannetta Irakissa ja muualla. Turvapaikanhakijavirta Eurooppaan on pitkälti Iranin syytä.
Klikkaa laajentaaksesi...

Syyriasta joukkojen pois vetäminen palvelee nimenomaan Irania. Sen vuoksi päätös vetäytymisestä onkin niin outo. Ihan ensimmäinen ajatus joka uutisesta tuli mieleen oli jonkinlainen taktinen veto jolla muutetaan koko pelikenttää tarkoituksena saavuttaa jotain mitä nyt ikinä onkaan..Tai sitten yksinkertaisin vaihtoehto Putini ja Erdon kanssa tehty etupiirijako, mutta mitä Trump hyötyisi siitä, että antaa alueen vastustajille? Mitä Usa saa vastineeksi vai onko kyse puhtaasti Trumpista henkilönä. Hän hyötyy jotain..

Voisi veikata, että alueelle jäävät maat eivät kauaa väleissä pysy. Kurdien vuoksi ehkä hetken, mutta eturistiriita on väistämätön jo pelkästään Assadin aseman vuoksi jota tukee ehdoitta vain Iran.
 
aj77 kirjoitti:
Syyriasta joukkojen pois vetäminen palvelee nimenomaan Irania.
Klikkaa laajentaaksesi...


Siitä olen samaa mieltä siitä, että pelkkä joukkojen vetäminen palvelee Irania. Tosin kannattaa huomata, että ilmaiskujen lopettamisesta Syyriassa ei ole ollut mitään viitteitä.

Veikkaan nyt kuitenkin, että voimaa aletaan käyttämään Iranin maaperällä, tai ainakin toivokaamme niin.. Yhdysvaltojen sisäpolitiikka jopa vaatinee sen liikkeen.
 
Olen ollut lievästi Trumpin puolelle kallistunut, liberaaleja voimia vastaan puhuttaessa USAn valtapelistä. No Liberaaleja vastustan edelleen, mutta ilman Mattista katosi järjen ääni USAn hallinnosta. Meikäläinen hyppäsi juuri pois Trump trainin kyydistä. Mad dog oli ja on hieno ihminen, kova, mutta oikeudenmukainen johtaja. Harmi että kävi näin. Eli ilman Mad dogia, vastustan kaikkia :cool:
 
Raskain mielin kulkee ajatus. Mattis lähtee. Vakaus ja turva koetuksella. Suomi yksi suurista menettäjistä. Hyvää joulua vaan terrorijärjestöille!​
— Ilkka Kanerva (@ikekanerva) 21. joulukuuta 2018​

https://www.is.fi/politiikka/art-2000005943217.html

Yhteistyö Yhdysvaltain puolustusministeri Jim Mattisin kanssa on ollut erinomaista. Toivotan hänelle kaikkea hyvää jatkossa.​
— Jussi Niinistö (@jniinisto) 21. joulukuuta 2018​
 
Trump unleashed: Mattis exit paves way for global chaos

James Mattis just cut the world's safety net.

Grave faces on Capitol Hill and the shaken voices of retired military men on cable news reflected the Pentagon chief's renown as more than a decorated warrior, retired four-star general and the most admired Cabinet member.
He is a talisman.
For two years, politicians, foreign policy experts and allied diplomats would quietly confide their belief that as long as Mattis was in the Situation Room, alongside the impulsive Trump, everything would be OK. Now, he's going.

The defense secretary's decision to quit Thursday was a warning that will ring through history about an impulsive President who spurns advice, disdains America's friends and proudly repudiates the codes of US leadership that have endured since World War II.
Mattis stopped Washington in its tracks -- even after months of stunning plot twists in Donald Trump's presidency, and as stock markets plunge, a legal net tightens around the White House and the government is about to shut down.
His recognition that he could no longer work for an erratic commander in chief who decided to pull US troops out of Syria, apparently without consulting anyone, could lead to a new period of global uncertainty as Trump slips his remaining restraints.


Grave faces on Capitol Hill and the shaken voices of retired military men on cable news reflected the Pentagon chief's renown as more than a decorated warrior, retired four-star general and the most admired Cabinet member.
He is a talisman.
For two years, politicians, foreign policy experts and allied diplomats would quietly confide their belief that as long as Mattis was in the Situation Room, alongside the impulsive Trump, everything would be OK.
Even after the departure of other so-called adults in the room, such as former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and ex-national security adviser H.R. McMaster, Mattis stayed.
Fears of a clash between the US and Chinese navies in the South China Sea, an opportunistic Russia, meltdowns in the Middle East or a sudden global crisis with Trump at the helm were eased by thoughts of the scholar-general in the chain of command.
Now, he's going. And the world had better prepare for an unchained US President.

Shock and concern
https://maanpuolustus.net/javascript:void(0);


"There is a lot of concern like I have never seen in my life," Adam Kinzinger, a Republican House member from Illinois, said on CNN, reflecting the sentiments of his colleagues at the events of the last few days.
A senior conservative House GOP member, who supports Trump, told CNN's Jim Acosta: "The wheels may be coming off."
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio warned in a tweet that the Mattis resignation letter made it "abundantly clear that we are headed towards a series of grave policy errors which will endanger our nation, damage our alliances & empower our adversaries."
Such unusual anxiety about Trump among Republicans on Capitol Hill suggested that Mattis might have achieved at least part of his aim in resigning.
Though he addressed his letter to Trump, it was a warning clearly targeted at the lawmakers, especially Republicans, who so admire him. It was also aimed at Americans outside Washington, flagging that the nation is heading down a dangerous path.
Trump's order of an immediate withdrawal from Syria -- the final straw for Mattis -- defied the counsel of his national security experts. Now, it also looks like the start of a period in which America's turmoil could destabilize the globe.
Earlier Thursday, a senior administration official told CNN's Jake Tapper that Mattis was "vehemently opposed" to the Syria decision and a possible Afghanistan troop withdrawal.
The move appeared to have been conducted without consulting allies whose soldiers have fought and died alongside Americans in the 17 years since 9/11.
Trump has every right as commander in chief, given the broad sweep of his constitutional powers and the victory he secured in 2016, to reshape America's posture around the globe. He made promises to bring US soldiers home from foreign battlefields -- a goal shared by many Americans weary of years of war.
Trump's voters wanted someone to shake up Washington and the world and so are unlikely to care that he's spooking the Washington establishment with his populist nationalist approach to the world.
But critics charge that Trump's troop withdrawals will simply hand over tracts of the Middle East and southwest Asia to American's foes such as Iran, Russia, ISIS and the Taliban.
Another Republican who usually supports Trump, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, warned an Afghan withdrawal would pave the way "toward another 9/11."


A staggering repudiation



Mattis went further, suggesting that Trump is taking aim at the very foundations of US global power.
In his resignation letter, Mattis suggested Trump's worldview was antithetical to everything he held dear in 40 years in uniform. Those values were not just his own, they are the bedrock of a nation that was a stabilizing force that made the world more safe.
He implied that Trump, who believed Russian President Vladimir Putin over his own intelligence agents about Russian election meddling, and who has cozied up to dictators, such as Kim Jong Un, had got America's friends and enemies confused.
"My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues," Mattis wrote.
"We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances," he continued.
In the coming days, the resignation of Mattis is likely to revive sobering questions over whether Trump is fit to be commander in chief and raised the possibility -- reinforced by a report that Trump is now planning an Afghan withdrawal -- that the President plans to engineer a single-handed retreat from world.
"The President has taken a wrecking ball to every pillar of stability and security we have erected over the past 60, 70 years," an emotional William Cohen, himself a former defense secretary, told CNN's Jim Sciutto.
Cohen spoke to Mattis on Wednesday night and said he was distraught over Trump's Syria order, which he viewed as a desertion of America's allies, especially the Kurds.
Paraphrasing his friend's mindset, Cohen added: "'I have never resigned from anything, I have carried the fight in every battle I have been in, but I cannot do this in the name of our country.'"
It is clear that Syria was the last straw for Mattis. But not the only one.
The defense secretary stood by as Trump has appeased Russia, which he sees as a dangerous US foe. He saw the President decide off-the-cuff to halt US military exercises on the Korean Peninsula after being charmed by Kim. Mattis was even forced to explain why Trump deployed troops to the southern border in a political stunt to bolster his hardline message on immigration. And he's seen Trump insult allied leaders to their faces at bitter global summits.
Given such developments, it's no longer absurd to ask questions like whether the President will suddenly decide to pull American troops home from South Korea after decades of keeping the peace or even pulling out of NATO.
"We are in a new world here ... " former Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark said on "Cuomo Prime Time." "We've got to come to terms with the character of the President and how he makes decisions."

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/21/politics/james-mattis-donald-trump-world/index.html
 
Viimeinen niitti Mattisille oli Trumpin päätös vetää Yhdysvaltojen joukot pois Syyriasta. Trump ilmoitti asiasta keskiviikkona. Trumpin päätös on nostattanut kritiikkiä useilla tahoilla, sillä sen on pelätty johtavan jopa Isisin uuteen nousuun.

Syyria tuli ihan heti mieleen myös minulle kun erosta kuulin. Vaikea kuvitella että Mattis ja Trump ovat vetäytymisestä samoilla linjoilla :ROFLMAO: Mattisin kuppi on keikkunut jo kauan, mutta nyt se meni sitten nurin.

Huono homma vaikka ei siinä mitään yllättävää ole.
 
Jotain positiivista, kuitenkin, jos median jutut pitävät paikkaansa ISISin vahvistumisesta.

IS:n vahvistuminen heikentää Assadia ja Venäjää...
 
Trumpin kerrotaan keskustelleen mahdollisesta keskuspankin johtajan Jerome Powellin erottamisesta. Syynä markkinoiden sukellus josta Trump syyttää keskuspankin koronnostoja. Powellin erottaminen tosin saisi markkinat vielä rajumpaan pudotukseen sillä keskuspankin johtaja on tähän asti ollut täysin itsenäinen, pankin muuttaminen poliittikan välineeksi toisi valtavan epävarmuustekijän markkinoille.
President Donald Trump has discussed firing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell as his frustration with the central bank chief intensified following this week’s interest-rate increase and months of stock-market losses, according to four people familiar with the matter.

Advisers close to Trump aren’t convinced he would move against Powell and are hoping that the president’s latest bout of anger will dissipate over the holidays, the people said on condition of anonymity. Some of Trump’s advisers have warned him that firing Powell would be a disastrous move.

Yet the president has talked privately about firing Powell many times in the past few days, said two of the people.

Any attempt by Trump to push out Powell would have potentially devastating ripple effects across financial markets, undermining investors’ confidence in the central bank’s ability to shepherd the economy without political interference. It would come as markets have plummeted in recent weeks, with the major stock indexes already down sharply for the year.

White House spokespeople declined to comment, as did Fed spokeswoman Michelle Smith.

Trump’s public and private complaints about members of his administration have often been a first step toward their departures -- including former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, his first Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and outgoing chief of staff John Kelly.

It’s unclear how much legal authority the president has to fire Powell. The Federal Reserve Act says governors may be “removed for cause by the President.” Since the chairman is also a governor, that presumably extends to him or her, but the rules around firing the leader are legally ambiguous, as Peter Conti-Brown of the University of Pennsylvania notes in his book on Fed independence.

Such a move would represent an unprecedented challenge to the Fed’s independence. Though he was nominated by the president, Powell was thought to be insulated from Trump’s dissatisfaction by a tradition of respect for the independence of the central bank.

That separation of politics from monetary policy is supposed to instill confidence that Fed officials will do what’s right for the economy over the long term rather than bend to the short-term whims of a politician.

Trump’s frustration with Powell has greatly intensified in recent days, said two of the people. Though Trump’s aim is to stop interest rate increases that slow economic growth, such a move could backfire by roiling already turbulent financial markets.

Even routine changes at the top of central banks create uncertainty in markets as investors try to assess how tough a new leader may be in preventing the economy from overheating and accelerating inflation. Another problem with dismissing a sitting Fed chief may be finding a replacement who wants assurance that he or she won’t succumb to the same fate as Powell.

Trump is in the midst of a rolling shake-up of his administration. Since the November midterm elections, he’s announced the exits of Sessions, Kelly, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and Defense Secretary James Mattis. At the same, the threat of a government shutdown has added to the sense among investors of disarray in Washington.

Equities just recorded their worst week since 2011, with the S&P 500 falling 7.1 percent and the Nasdaq Composite descending into a bear market. Trump has laid a lot of the blame on the Fed, saying at one point in October that the central bank was “going loco” for raising rates.

Some of Trump’s ire has been directed at Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for his part in persuading the president to select Powell to lead the Fed.

Powell has borne the brunt of the criticism recently, peppered by public complaints about interest rates from the president and at least one of his advisers. Less than two weeks ago, before the Fed’s latest rate decision, Trump said Powell was “being too aggressive, far too aggressive, actually far too aggressive.” He told Reuters the central bank “would be foolish” to proceed with a rate hike.

The Fed announced a widely anticipated rate hike on Wednesday and Powell signaled he’ll be more cautious about tightening next year. But investors’ concerns over the chairman’s comments led to U.S. equities to record their steepest declines for any Federal Open Market Committee announcement day since 2011.
Klikkaa laajentaaksesi...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-s-powell-after-latest-rate-hike?srnd=premium
 
Tekstistä huolimatta Mattisin ilme on aika kertova:

48403194_2053520378076327_7489972087147200512_n.jpg
 
Sinun täytyy kirjautua vastataksesi.
Back
Top