President Trump took to Twitter to angrily condemn the Wall Street Journal Monday for a weekend editorial critical of his Afghanistan policy, suggesting he was making decisions “impulsively” in the ongoing war.
Trump fired back that the US has been in Afghanistan for 19 years, and that anything done at this point is “hardly impulsive.” He went on to suggest that the Taliban is mixed on if they want the US to withdraw, arguing that the Taliban makes a fortune on the US presence.
Trump has been reported for months to be keen to wrap up the withdrawal from Afghanistan, a plan called for by the recent peace deal, and the Pentagon has confirmed that the pullout is on schedule. This has been resisted by some military brass, as well as hawkish press outlets.
Trump went on to declare the Wall Street Journal to be “fake news” over the editorial, while bragging about the popularity of his press briefings, noting the Wall Street Journal‘s editorial didn’t mention just how popular he is.
A newspaper is attempting to prolong the forever war.
Yes, like him or not,
name any other political figure who would actually END
the Afghanistan episode.
I am holding out hope for a nice “November Surprise” with us getting out completely.
Abe Lincoln. Ask Trump.
Remember the journalists credo, “If it bleeds, it leads!” It is an industry that based its awards on yellow journalism. https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/04/05/pulitzer-prize/
He should just imagine how popular he will be if he pulled pronto from Iraq — again — from Syria (this time for real), and Libya. Then remive ships off Hodeidah shoreline, and STOP blockade of food and medicine for Yemen (for real, real). Then stop confronting Chinese influence in Chinese seas, and while at it — pull out all the bases and baselette around the gobe and fill up some of the empty commercial office space — so money can be spent home.
What are you afraid off? That some tin pot dictators would go to Russia and China? They have learned from past mistakes — they do not give money or anything else hoping people would love them. Thus your tin pot would be back — as Russia and China do not do business with unreliable partners. You want control of territory or oceans — you are welcome to it. In case of any real trouble, those things would be the first to go.
There is going to be no pullout from Afghanistan. That would be un-American, right?
Is there an oil well, a mine or some such valuable asset we can protect from their owners and stay, just a little, pretty please? Then one can always restart it when another fancy terror group makes an appearance on our ever so watchful media!
He will be out of Afghanistan by election time.
I don’t think the plan was to be completely out by then. I believe it was spread out over 14 months and that time frame would take us into next year.
Whatever wars,
the point being, by election time
there will be little else to do but pack up the remaining essentials and
turn off the lights.
Wasn’t arguing your point. Was just adding to it.
Every time Trump says something that makes sense he has to ruin it with more narcissistic rambling nonsensical bullsh*t. Like this:
“Trump went on to declare the Wall Street Journal to be “fake news” over the editorial, while bragging about the popularity of his press briefings, noting the Wall Street Journal‘s editorial didn’t mention just how popular he is.”
Like fingernails scraping across a chalkboard.
I think this is his version of a “little ordinary folk”, he thinks we like it!
As grating as this unnecessary stupidity is — he has done something no president has done before. Undermined the trust in media. Now not only the better informed, but a much larger spectrum of voting public is mistrusting media. History is made of many such incidental personalities and motives..
Since when has it been a president’s job to “undermine trust in media” ? Any idiot can find a stupid media spot any time, throughout history. You are confusing the fact trump only wants people to believe what he bloviates any given minute. Cripes, trump is the media
Indeed. It’s frustrating having the antiwar and antiempire position represented by a spoiled teenager.
Taibi had an interesting point the other day: it is precisely Trump’s narcissism and towering self regard that makes him resistant to and hated by the imperial stormtroopers like the writers of the WSJ. At the end of the day, these “gifts” make him resistant to their usual tools in a way that no president has been since Kennedy.
Note that Kennedy was also a rich boy who didn’t owe much to the system and therefore was pretty independent minded, especially as he matured.
Very much so. I was his early supporter for his unmatched wrecking ball personality. I never thought he was going to make it through the choppers of party machinery.
And we needed a wrecking ball. Polite discourse with the System and its Hubris leads nowhere.
But this comes with the good, the bad, the ugly, the stupid, and outright dangerous.
Agree with you. One thing re the “outright dangerous” … all presidents are obviously dangerous; it comes with the ludicrous powers of the job. Trump is the least dangerous president we have had since Ike, however. The reason why is precisely because he has so little trust from the system that they question his every move.
So where W or Obama or HRC could get away with starting a new war, pretty much at whim, Trump has less leeway. He’s questioned and leaked on at every turn. Makes him less dangerous, at least a little.
Have to take what you can get 🙂
Trump Cocky Bragger not very well read yet he is the greatest president of my life time and I’am much older than Trump .
“antiwar and anti empire position”…lol..where did you get that idea? a trumpU class brochure ? Let me know when he has 1 less troop deployed in any theater, air strikes are reduced to the level when he came in (long way to go there).
Antiwar and anti-empire position, not actuality … though, and for all my frustrations with him, no big new wars in three years and counting now, despite several tempting opportunities.
It is what it is. Would I have rather had Ron Paul or Ralph Nader in the WH? Any day of the week. But, as we saw, it’s impossible.
Put another way, disagreeable and incompetent empire is better than cold-blooded and murderous empire any day of the week.
“tempting opportunities”…no, trump tried hard to war on both Iran, and Venezuela, they were just wise enough to not take the bait. No thanks to trump there.
For trump to have a “position”, is ludicrous. That is what the media forever does. The POTUS enacts policy, for war, or peace. For trump, its war.
But he created the “several tempting opportunities”.
And continues.
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/05/19/us-threatens-ships-in-persian-gulf-tells-them-to-stay-clear/
Trump has not started one single war .
Right. Like marrying a gal that was beaten in her last marriage, so you begin beating her and claim…”I wasn’t the one that started beating her”
And you starve others and say you didn’t beat them.
I don’t really care that Trump preens about his popularity.
I wouldn’t either if he was actually a man of peace and liberty. But he’s neither so his constant self adoration gets very irritating.
God, I hate agreeing with that c*nt.
Nothing in the op ed shows the author is against the peace process, or is promoting further occupation. Simply stated that the trump process, if there is one, is erratic and inconsistent. The process requires more attention than screwing around waiting to see what’s in your reality show script next week.
Trump has railed at FOX News lately because they are not subservient enough to him and his ideas, like hydroxychloroquine. Did you hear all the giant sucking sounds at the televised cabinet meeting with Trump yesterday? He’s got his cabinet and staff well trained.
WSJ is a mouthpiece for the PTB. They are almost hysterical at the thought that the Flynn-Kislyak tapes might be produced to show exactly what Flynn was up to.