17 thoughts on “Conflicts of Interest: Will Trump Surround Himself With Hawks?”
If not for his hair, I might find The Donald a tad frightening. Truly, he must be a sad person, to have so much wealth but not much soul?….
Clearly, one must ask: what the heck is up with the hair Don?!
I like his hair. He tried a more normal style, looked terrible.
Well, surely there are hawks and then there’s chicken hawks?!….;-}
Israel will decide.
He already has. He's a chickenhawk – a narcissist that has no problem starting wars – he just doesn't want to be blamed for them – like every other President.
I keep pointing this out – that ANY President will start a war as long as he thinks he won't be blamed for it – but absolutely no one seems to get it. Every dumb-ass American has an inbred respect for the office of the President and no one appears capable of recognizing that every occupant of that office is a corrupt warmonger owned by the real power structure – or he wouldn't be there. There will NEVER be an INDEPENDENT President or a third party President.
Get it through your heads. The PERSONALITY of the President DOES NOT MATTER. He will do what the real power structure in the US wants hm to do.
It can matter somewhat. It’s just not absolute.
Both Democrats and Republicans start wars and end some wars and let others go on or restart wars they ended.
Vance says he and Trump will stay out of Ukraine but they speak from both sides of their mouths that should be glued shut. Trump says he'll be more hawkish to Russia in his 2nd term and will invade Mexico.
If he invaded Mexico, there would be no need for a wall, it would be a barrier to his goal.
I’d appreciate if antiwar would run a Raimondo style analysis of Vance. I rather like him, but I’m not always right.
He seems the best pick from what’s possible, other than Tulsi.
He was not against abortion, then he was. There were other little changes to enhance his opportunities. He is a politician, for heaven sake.
Bah, that’s minor. He seems like a good pick. Maybe he’ll be reticent to enter a war due to his experience as a marine. Duncan Hunter Sr. wasn’t for the Iraq War. Hunter had been in Vietnam.
Vance was a combat correspondent. I don’t know what that is. Regardless, his political positioning suggests he cares for Americans. Apparently he’s even open to unions. I don’t usually like unions. I’m a believer in unions sometimes being beneficial.
A “combat correspondent” who is also an actual member of the armed forces generally writes what amount to press releases on operations that can be published in military/government publications but also released for use by real newspapers, etc.
If you’ve seen the movie Full Metal Jacket, the main character (Joker) is a combat correspondent.
Non-military media also have combat correspondents who either operate independently (at considerable risk to themselves) or get “embedded” with military units and basically function in the same role as the military combat correspondents unless they want to get kicked out and sent home.
KInda looks like it's starting out that way, doesn't it? I mean, his VP choice, for one thing. "Iran needs to be punched. HARD" Vance.
Vance is solid. I hope he’s strong on foreign policy. I just learned that’s the vp pick.
I just read what he wants to do. He’s for winding down in Ukraine and having what he believes are fair solutions there. But that’s so he can start more $h1t with China by sending “aid” to Taiwan. He wants to make sure the MIC is satiated. Which they never are, so…. Oh, and he thinks we should “hit Iran, hard”. Solid maybe, but as a solid warmonger.
Even so, he’s the best Trump could do. Tulsi would have been better though. Tulsi is incredible but imperfect.
I obviously don’t want MIC/war anywhere/intervention anywhere, etc.
“Tulsi is incredible but imperfect.”
I agree that she’s neither credible nor perfect.
Trying to pass her off as anything resembling an antiwar candidate is an even bigger con than doing the same with Trump (Trump was never “Republicans’ favorite Democratic hawk” as Gabbard was, before switching to ‘I’m all for murdering as many Muslims as possible so long as there’s no chance of US casualties” as Gabbard did).
If not for his hair, I might find The Donald a tad frightening. Truly, he must be a sad person, to have so much wealth but not much soul?….
Clearly, one must ask: what the heck is up with the hair Don?!
I like his hair. He tried a more normal style, looked terrible.
Well, surely there are hawks and then there’s chicken hawks?!….;-}
Israel will decide.
He already has. He's a chickenhawk – a narcissist that has no problem starting wars – he just doesn't want to be blamed for them – like every other President.
I keep pointing this out – that ANY President will start a war as long as he thinks he won't be blamed for it – but absolutely no one seems to get it. Every dumb-ass American has an inbred respect for the office of the President and no one appears capable of recognizing that every occupant of that office is a corrupt warmonger owned by the real power structure – or he wouldn't be there. There will NEVER be an INDEPENDENT President or a third party President.
Get it through your heads. The PERSONALITY of the President DOES NOT MATTER. He will do what the real power structure in the US wants hm to do.
It can matter somewhat. It’s just not absolute.
Both Democrats and Republicans start wars and end some wars and let others go on or restart wars they ended.
Vance says he and Trump will stay out of Ukraine but they speak from both sides of their mouths that should be glued shut. Trump says he'll be more hawkish to Russia in his 2nd term and will invade Mexico.
If he invaded Mexico, there would be no need for a wall, it would be a barrier to his goal.
I’d appreciate if antiwar would run a Raimondo style analysis of Vance. I rather like him, but I’m not always right.
He seems the best pick from what’s possible, other than Tulsi.
He was not against abortion, then he was. There were other little changes to enhance his opportunities. He is a politician, for heaven sake.
Bah, that’s minor. He seems like a good pick. Maybe he’ll be reticent to enter a war due to his experience as a marine. Duncan Hunter Sr. wasn’t for the Iraq War. Hunter had been in Vietnam.
Vance was a combat correspondent. I don’t know what that is. Regardless, his political positioning suggests he cares for Americans. Apparently he’s even open to unions. I don’t usually like unions. I’m a believer in unions sometimes being beneficial.
A “combat correspondent” who is also an actual member of the armed forces generally writes what amount to press releases on operations that can be published in military/government publications but also released for use by real newspapers, etc.
If you’ve seen the movie Full Metal Jacket, the main character (Joker) is a combat correspondent.
Non-military media also have combat correspondents who either operate independently (at considerable risk to themselves) or get “embedded” with military units and basically function in the same role as the military combat correspondents unless they want to get kicked out and sent home.
KInda looks like it's starting out that way, doesn't it? I mean, his VP choice, for one thing. "Iran needs to be punched. HARD" Vance.
Vance is solid. I hope he’s strong on foreign policy. I just learned that’s the vp pick.
I just read what he wants to do. He’s for winding down in Ukraine and having what he believes are fair solutions there. But that’s so he can start more $h1t with China by sending “aid” to Taiwan. He wants to make sure the MIC is satiated. Which they never are, so…. Oh, and he thinks we should “hit Iran, hard”. Solid maybe, but as a solid warmonger.
Even so, he’s the best Trump could do. Tulsi would have been better though. Tulsi is incredible but imperfect.
I obviously don’t want MIC/war anywhere/intervention anywhere, etc.
“Tulsi is incredible but imperfect.”
I agree that she’s neither credible nor perfect.
Trying to pass her off as anything resembling an antiwar candidate is an even bigger con than doing the same with Trump (Trump was never “Republicans’ favorite Democratic hawk” as Gabbard was, before switching to ‘I’m all for murdering as many Muslims as possible so long as there’s no chance of US casualties” as Gabbard did).
Well, there was Sarah………….