Posted on 12/17/2016 8:22:09 PM PST by dynachrome
Look at the letter after the last names of the presidents who undertook those projects.
Of course. What other goal can there be? Barak Hussein Obama Soetoro is a Mohammedan and an Islamist and in charge of the most powerful country in the world. What else can he do? We must take comfort in that he is also somewhat of a coward and certainly not “decisive.”
The answer to the first question is that it is the Euros who would benefit most from that Saudi / Qatar - to- Europe pipeline. Europe’s need to buy gas is somewhat more urgent than the Gulf States need to sell it — the “Gulf States won ‘t literally freeze to death in the winter if they don’t sell what is at present a largely undeveloped resource. The Euros have the additional problem that they do NOT want to stay in a position where Putin can dictate to them because he has a near monopoly on the gas Europe needs (especially in certain countries.) This is particularly a problem for the globalists — though it gets right down to the average European rather quickly, too, should a major dispute arise.”
You make a good case here, but this is only because the Euros have created this situation by their asinine refusal to develop their own energy resources. There is plentiful oil, gas, and coal in their region that remains untouched due to their complete capitulation to the global warming and anti-growth Green fanatics in their countries. Europeans have the same access to the newer fracking, horizontal drilling, and clean-coal techniques that we have, as well as access to nuclear power options. Yet they choose to remain slaves to the Russians in Asia and the Arabs in the Middle East for their necessary energy. It’s their own damn fault.
Glad you posted.. I forgot about the pipeline. I honestly only remember mention of it,but no details.
I am thinking it was about the pipeline too. In addition, I think that certain elements also wanted to see anyone that had been within the Soviet circle of influence to be replaced. Also, perhaps the pipeline could make Europe totally independent of Russian oil, if necessary.
Whatever their reasoning or whether it’s just pure greed,
I just don’t think that we need to engage in total destruction of a whole country to get a regime change, so for whatever reason, the policies we have been following are an EPIC fail, and resulted in the death and suffering of millions.
I am posting a link - from Heritage Foundation - Protecting America Series - General Mattis Speaker - State of the World. Get a good look at General “Mad Dog” Mattis our soon to be Secretary of Defense. He speaks about Middle East, Russia, and China.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCD5zHBNWG8
“This is necessarily a very abbreviated analysis. (I’ve completely left out the Turks, for one thing!) :-)”
Thank you for all of that. The opportunity to read posts like yours is the main reason I regularly donate to Free Republic.
Just imagine if any of this information could be gleaned from our mainstream media. They’re still going on about our noble intentions and Russia’s crimes against humanity.
Especially revealing is the significant problems that Russia is facing, and the dangers that we are facing from Russia, as well as from the radical Jihads.
The Russian federation could break apart, and that is not in our interest to have their loose nukes all over the place.
Russia has the longest borders in the world-hard to provide security. Russia has huge number of violent Jihadists. Their economy is not sound. Their demographics suck - Many of their males are dying of TB, HIV, and alcoholism, that the males have declining longevity.
The women due to so much reliance on abortion, are no longer able to carry to term. Simple math - they will eventually not be able to maintain it's influence.
It has threatened not only Warsaw, but has had nuclear capable bombers close to San Francisco. They are outside Scotland, and Norway. The person who threatened to turn America into Radioactive Ash was promptly promoted by Putin.
Short term danger of miscalculation, midterm danger mid-term the Russian Federation could break apart and that is not in our best interests at this time.
Then he turns to explain the China situation.
Oh, I agree! (Like I said, my piece was much, probably too much, abbreviated...)
A good analysis, thanks for bringing this to our attention.
“....just because intervention one day is counterproductive does not mean that intervention another day is indispensable to our survival.....”
Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point. Is it possible you intended to say “not indispensable”?
Yes, thank you for catching that.
You’re welcome.
By the way, I just bookmarked a recent post of yours on the global situation Trump is inheriting. There is so much to absorb I will have to go back and read it a few more times.
Thanks
I would be very interested in your reaction.
It was a thread entitled “Grand Strategy comes to the Oil Patch”
The part I found most intriguing was the following statement:
“Finally, Russia is the key because it is possible to do business with a rational thug such as Vladimir Putin while in China the elites will find themselves increasingly constrained by events involving upheavals of hundreds of millions of people.”
The complex regional dynamics and pressure points that you describe are a bit over my head, or at least I feel ill equipped to form a strategy out of it all. The best I can do is be duly impressed by the seriousness of the problems we face.
That single point, however, about the Chinese leaders “riding a tiger that they can’t get off of” makes a lot of sense to me - perhaps the beginning of a broad strategy that I can use as a guide when observing how Trump’s foriegn policy unfolds.
Up until now, I’ve had to content myself with the principle of “peace through strength”, which although light years ahead of any Obama “strategy”, is only a slogan - so I appreciate your summary.
Note the freak-out in the media when Trump said his now famous line “You’d be in jail”. He wasn’t referring to specifically jailing political opponents, but instead, the policies he would have in place (and will) are NOT those that protect the interest of the criminal organizations such as the Clinton Foundation.
Had Obama not been stacking the deck, what you state WOULD be the truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.