While You Were Sleeping: Trump Was Tweeting


Whining about Trump is not a strategy for national leadership.
How long will The Left wander aimlessly in the wilderness bitterly muttering to itself?
I don't think that Our Dan is in charge of strategy for "national leadership", Yosemite dear.
I [heart] you, Mrs. Vel-DuRay.

We'd be better off if he were.
There are events in the world of US foreign policy that have nothing to do with Putin conspiracy theories. For one thing, the CIA director, sec of state and head of NSA have all recently changed and include people who have been advocating a more aggressive policy in the ongoing US/KSA side of the war Middle East for years now. The extent of the Russian thing is this- no doubt some of the corrupt rich idiots in power with Trump and some of the corrupt rich but less idiotic Russians laundered money or made illegal deals. No doubt Russians used their PR machine in foreign elections- the US does this too, in fact much worse. Also probably the Trump people, including oil and gas businessmen, would've liked to allow Putin access to the Western European natgas market again in exchange for other business deals- it would actually be better for certain business interests and certainly better for Putin. It looks like they met before and immediately after the election to talk about this as well as the potential for selling smears of political opponents. If you want to be concerned about this, ok well and good. This sort of thing goes on all over the world, and if you look for similar shady arrangements with China or KSA etc, you will find them too, but yes if you are concerned about it, that's cool, some level of investigation is useful, and hey if it brings down the GOP great. I hope they throw the whole lot in prison.

But it's not a global pervasive plot at the center of American empire- it's getting cartoonish if you can't consider anything else that is going on. It's getting to the point that liberals cannot pay attention to anything without seeing some Putin conspiracy theory and it's ridiculous to the point of almost delusion now that our multi-year multi-theater proxy war with Putin is escalating and their still seeing collusion. Whatever connections Trump had with Putin, that's been over for over a year now. His stance against Putin has been increasingly hawkish- including increasing sanctions, returning to Hillary's policy of NATO buildup, appointing anti-Russia officials to every level of the US military and intelligence community. Is this inconsistent with what he said during the campaign and what he says off-the-cuff sometimes? Yes, because he is an idiot who honestly does not understand the situation in the Middle East. But there are only two possibilities: that Trump is a mastermind running everything from a secret pact with Putin, or Trump is a blustering old idiot who talks a lot while Bolton and Mattis and the GOP do exactly what they've been saying they want to do for years. This isn't about Trujmp and Putin- it is US foreign policy.

We should all be terrified by the possibility of war for regime change in Syria, regardless of how much a dick Assad is. He has never fully lost control of even 1/4 of Syria, now has consolidated power even more- the truth is that the US cannot remove Assad and even if they somehow do (with a huge commitment of troops and money) it will result in a situation like Libya and Iraq. What the US prefers is to maintain a presence in that country- even if it prolongs the war and escalates the violence- rather than allow the Russia/Iran side to encroach on our hegemony in that region. Add to this a consideration of what is already going on in Yemen, Qatar, Palestine, plus the unresolved wars in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan (and their spillovers in surrounding countries) and then the possibility of escalation of tension with Iran (war with them would be insane) and any liberals who are still thinking about this within the context of a pee tape or something like that need to get a grip on reality.

Especially you should know better in cities like Seattle where MBS just earlier this week toured the weapons factories and tech giants and military officials who are giving him the billions of dollars of support and equipment he needs to continue to wage US proxy war including his US-supported genocide in Yemen. If you are looking for collusion, it's right out in the open. And as for the US side in the war with Syria, while I'm not denying that Assad is vicious, so is MBS, and it might be worthwhile to look at our own allies in the FSA there before deciding how much we really want to commit to arming/funding them (hint: there's al Qaeda crossover). Liberals get a grip, we are escalating a conflict (that is not new by the way, this started with Bush and was exacerbated under Obama) and all you can do is think about overblown Russian conspiracy theories. To the point now that when we are on the verge of war with them, cognitive dissonance is making you consider that it's all phony to distract from Trump & Putin's real secret plans? Do you realize how insane and stupid that sounds?

Dan I love you on sex advice and on the advocacy for LGBT, women, & children, and your great stance on civil rights both with your support of the movement for black lives and immigration advocacy but you honestly don't know what the fuck you are talking about in foreign policy, and you never have. Please learn a lesson from your support of the Iraq war and shut the fuck up about things that are WAY over your head, or else take some time out and learn about them first.
Dotard's social media posts look a lot the posts my 7 year-old autistic nephew looses when he gets his paws on his dad's smart phone. Only my nephew doesn't watch too much TV.
@5) I doubt Dan is shivering over your sesame-street analysis.
@4 really?


I suppose if you're into purging about half the country out of existence then maybe Dan would be a great leader.
Someday America will learn that arming extremist and fascist religious rebels is not a good idea, even when they pinky swear to be on your side.

At least Syria will soon be a healthy and peaceful democracy like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.

@5: It is kindergarten level tin foil hat garbage, but it makes him feel good (and smart!) to type it out. It is catharsis to help come to terms with the fact that his beloved establishment Democrats lost an election to an incompetent rube who appeared to be barely trying.

Much like when a small child writes a note to their parent that says "I hate you." It is meaningless and incorrect, but the act of writing it gets the emotions out, and helps them cope.
@9 It's getting scary though. I mean, I assume Dan is not joking here- maybe the jokes on me and this was satire? He literally believes that Trump is getting Putin's wink-wink's acceptance for Tweets like this? How does he explain the actual real on-the-ground wars? Wink-wink dead children in Yemen? Wink-wink destroyed relations with Iran? Wink-wink Turks taking Afrin? Wink-wink increased NATO fortifications and sanctions?

Whatever Trump's personal feelings for Putin (my guess is he respects tough guys and likes him personally and would've liked to collude with him) the facts of US actions on the ground during the Trump admin are those of escalating proxy war with Russia, and it would require some serious bending of those facts to the point of frightening delusion to see it any other way. It actually really scares me. If this is the liberal stance on the situation, it will be impossible to build up an antiwar movement among them.

I like to think they just don't understand foreign policy and need to turn off the cable news. There is literally no one else in the world who believes this overblown Russian stuff to this extent- I think they are in an echo chamber?

Also I'm a little worried that when people really accept a simplistic (but wrong) explanation for a thing and it starts to fall apart, they have two options- one is to admit some more nuance and the other is to double down- that requires your acceptance of even more far-fetched version of your original explanation and little by little, things that would've seemed insane to you a year ago now seem normal. So while all the evidence is there that Bolton and the GOP really are going for an even more aggressive stance on the conflict, while MBS was literally just in the US meeting with all the rich people and politicians (including Bushes and Baker) - this after Trump made a deal with him for billions of dollars- the largest weapons deal in world history- while this is going on, someone could actually claim that it's not really happening, just a phony charade wink-wink with Putin who knows it's all fake cover for some investigation into money laundering and porn stars? It's hard to step back if you are that deeply entrenched in something like this. I don't even know what to recommend though it concerns me as an American. Until just this moment I did believe we could get liberals to oppose some of this slaughter, despite all the Dems that just voted to continue killing Yemenis. But if their stance is that none of this is really a conflict but just a wink-wink fake thing, well shit I just don't know- it takes my breath away.
@8, hold on there, buddy, Republicans make up less than half the country. You lost the popular vote.

And yes, the world would be a better place for it if you took the guns you love to clutch and blew your deplorable brains out. You're a cancer.

#10- you are characterizing Trump's relation to Putin as one of personal admiration quite independent from any policy inititiatives by this administration. You dismiss out of hand that Putin could have compromat on Trump that is influencing his behavior.
I believe you to be naive. We do not know the extent of financial backing Trump received from Russia and all indications are that is something Trump & family do not want us to know.
Of all your examples of American policies hostile to Putin & Russian interests, none were initiated or advocated for by Trump himself. Indeed, all of his actions to date would tend toward reinforcing a theory of his being beholden to Russian influence, such as his reaction to the London poisoning incident.
There, when given an opportunity to support an ally and confront Russia, his silence was deafening.
@10: When Trump first got elected and the insane conspiracy theories started, some people started joking about "Trump Derangement Syndrome" as a nickname for the seemingly temporary hysteria.

Unfortunately, this has not abated, and it is causing normally thoughtful people to descend into such conspiracy theories and generally insane types of thoughts. I do agree that it can become troubling when these people are also very wealthy and with a big microphone like Dan Savage has.

I mean, they are full on into "fake war" conspiracies now. Think about how crazy that actually is.

That being said, way back when Obama was ignoring the crisis in Syria, he claimed that biological weapons were a red line and he would have to act (this ended up being a hollow threat), something that no one really thought was out of hand. Well, this is the second time Assad has allegedly used them since the election, so some sort of military intervention should not be seen as anything crazy.

Personally I think perhaps it is time to stop sending Americans to die for the tribal warfare and proxy wars of the Middle East. We don't even need the oil anymore. Pull out the carrier groups and see if the rest of the world want to bear the burden for a moment.

Oh no, the popular vote again.....?
We're simply going to have to come up with a parlour game that uses the popular vote that we can get out whenever The Left comes over;
you girls just can't get enough of it....

Or better yet;
we'll silkscreen some Tshirts;
"I won the Fucking POPULAR VOTE! and all I got was this lousy Tshirt..."
@14, Nope.

When Obama was president, you people came up with all sorts of retarded mentally deranged conspiracy theories. He was a muslim. He had no birth certificate. He was a founding member of ISIS. Etc. This was Obama Derangment Syndrome.

When you elected one of these deranged fuckups to the WH (well, not really, he lost the vote), you took it upon yourself to spam "Trump Derangement Syndrome." Because you're not just a dumb racist Trump voter, you're also incredibly uncreative.

And no, nobody actually uses that term, except for the bitter sufferers of Obama Derangement Syndrome such as yourself. And everybody, except those buffoons, knows there's no comparison between Trump's opposition and Obama's.

@15, Yosemite, every time you're going to falsely claim some kind of mandate, lie about your numbers, and shill for your retarded hero, people correct your errors.

You need to learn that actions have consequences. Cry some more.
First Dan Savage started the Iraq war, now he’s preemptively shutting down the anti-war movement. As a country we need to consider just how much power we’re willing to give our sex advice columnists. This is insanity!
However, speaking of the popular vote;

you do realize that a solid majority 51.8% of the votes were cast against Hillary, don't you?

And that 72% of the eligible voters did not vote for your girl.

And of course, Trump won a manly 30 1/4 states to Hillary's 19 3/4....

Too much to fit on a Tshirt;

perhaps a Victory Quilt?

or a triumphal column? like Trajan's Column?

Trump's Column?
@19, that's the stage of grief they call "bargaining." Good to see you moving on from denial
@19, I'm not going to bother to do the math because this is stupid but you understand those percentages are worse for Trump, right? He lost the popular vote. It's okay, he still won the presidency and nothing will change that, but for something that doesn't matter and you totally don't care about you sure spend a lot of time figuring out ways to make yourself feel better about it.
No one, it seems, is.
We fret about that.
It's all Idiot this and racism, sexism, xenophobia, religious bigotry, toxic nostalgia that...
We are looking for moral leadership from The Left to lead us out of this nightmare.

Where did you go, Joe DiMaggio?
Yosemite - lay off the crank and malt liquor for a while, and maybe sit out the next few rounds.
The fucking high hasn't even begun to wear off yet.
We watch election night clips of Rachael Maddow every now and then for a(nother) good laugh.
It. Will. NEVER. Get. Old.
@22, racists, sexists, xenophobic bigots such as yourself have no moral principles whatsoever. That's why you've rallied around Trump like he was just another burning cross.

lol. Morals.
@16: I doubt you can understand this, but when you rattle off crazy or dumb things other people said, it doesn't really apply to me, or affect me in any way.

Despite your hilariously impotent anger, you remain as predictable and creative as a well wound clock.
No, please; do the math;
tell us how- what- 75% of the voters did not vote for Trump but there he is in the Oval Office....
We never get tired of hearing The Left whine.
We're just terrible.
You kids should really cut us loose.
You deserve better.
@21 - No matter what happens, you'll always have November '16
@27, "I'm tired of hearing the left whine"

Yet here you are, spamming whines like the little crybaby bitch that you are.

@26, "It doesn't really apply to me."

See, you're only proving my point. You're lying through your teeth, everybody knows it, you're fooling nobody. Yet for some reason you expect people to play along with you like it's some weird little role playing fantasy.
@27 definitely something someone who is not desperately clinging to the past to seek refuge from their own deep-seated insecurities would say

Have you ever written anything that required thought?

@Dan Savage

Not being gay or promiscuous or sure that my biological masculinity is actually female, even his sex advice would be useless to me. Politics (or anything useful to ant rational person) is entirely outside any expertise this....gentleman has. But in a general way the trend of asking actors and sports stars and the niche famous like Mr. Savage their opinions on politics befuddles me.
Ouch, that really stings; you....you....you brute!

Everyday is a new adventure.
Bring it on.....
@30: Someone really struck a nerve with you today, didn't they? What was it that was said that got so far under your skin?

I'll tell you what little guy, I have an open comment history here from back to 2012. If you can find one comment I made that even suggested that Obama was a secret Muslim, or a non US citizen, I will never post here again. Should be easy for you, unless you are just lying through your teeth again.

Normally I would now say what you have to do if you are wrong, but I know you will never admit to it, or do it. Likely you will claim that the absence of those posts are proof that you are right somehow, so it doesn't really matter now does it?
I don't think it's the latter Dan, Trump is not savvy enough to be Machiavellian.
Where Dan sees inconsistency, I see consistency.

I see a quote from Trump in 2013 saying "we should attack Assad." I see a quote from Trump in 2018 saying "we should attack Assad."

What I don't see is Dan Savage objecting to this consistent message. I see a lot of taunting and sneering, but I do not see Dan Savage clearly saying "we should not attack Assad."
@36, In 2016 after the election Trump wanted to stop backing the rebels fighting Assad and align with Russia to go after ISIS in Syria. He may have said some things that were consistent with each other at given points in time but he has been all over the map. There is nothing consistent about any of it.


If you're looking for inconsistency, you're going to find it, in heaps.

But you can look for consistency, too-- not just in Trump's alien txt-pheromone emissions, but also in Dan Savage's political positions (or non-positions). And I suspect when you do look for consistency, especially when it's not immediately obvious, you'll gain a hell of a lot more insight into Trump, and his supporters, and the rest of the American body politic, than you ever will from cataloging any public figure's self-contradictions and congratulating yourself for it.
@38, What. Either he's had a consistent message or he hasn't. That goes for Dan as much as it does for Trump, though only one of their opinions on foreign policy actually matters, and it ain't the guy who writes a weekly column about blow jobs and butt plugs.

Well, congratulations, then, I suppose. If public-figure self-contradiction scorekeeping is what pleases you, then you're going to live a happy life.
@40, I'm not "scorekeeping". I responded directly to your assertion that Trump has been consistent about Syria when anyone with access to an internet search engine can see that this is not true.

If you're unwilling to look for consistency in Trump's foreign policy messaging, then of course you're never going to find it.

To my eye, even his isolationist episodes have been belligerent, and his message to his supporters about their place in the world, and his willingness to preserve it (or at least perpetuate the illusion) has been rather consistent.

If that kind of consistency doesn't interest you, so be it; you're clearly in good company. There are plenty of smart people out there who only care about the literal meaning of Trump's Tweets (such as there is) and couldn't care less about anything else they might be communicating.
I guess if you're capable of seeing consistency in the insane ramblings of a senile con artist who lies for sport then you're in possession of a valuable skill set as long as he remains president. For me when someone is says no/yes/no/maybe to war over the span of little over a year it is straining the definition of the word 'consistent' past the point of any recognizable meaning, regardless of what it might be telegraphing to the people who voted for him.
OR he's a completely unhinged idiot with no impulse control who simply acts on whatever thought happens to flare up in his addled brain and has no larger strategy whatsoever, nor even a sense of continuity for his personal experience of reality. (I think the evidence fits my scenario much better than the secret-genius-in-cahoots-with-Putin scenario.)
Also, I cheer everything EmmaLiz has written in this thread so far.

I'm a republican and hate that my party chose this guy. He's not good at the job and as far as I can tell a pretty unpleasant person. He does not represent conservative values or those of the party. Or any decent person cone to that. Nor would I at all want to do business with him or want him around my nieces.

But he's negotiating as he's done throughout his business career. He acts crazy for a while. Then he presents some position very much in his favor but.sane and hopes the opponent bites in that perceived window of rational behavior.

I couldn't behave that way. Nor would I want to. I don't know enough about finance at the level he works with it to know that it's worked or not for him. But it's a pretty consistent pattern of his.

And it has the side benefit of driving far left crazies like Dan Savage into frothing fits, which is hilarious for me. So a win there too.
"...the facts of US actions on the ground during the Trump admin are those of escalating proxy war with Russia..."

What "proxy war?" Talk about delusional.

Lobbing a few missiles (not even configures to destroy the runways they were aimed at) at an empty Syrian Air base that was up and running 8 hours later? Meanwhile Russian and Syrian aircraft have been slaughtering thousands of civilians unimpaired for months? With chemical weapons, no less.

Trump just gave over 24 hour warning to the "targets" of a pretend military operation - that's right, pretend - it didn't even happen.

None of the so-called sanctions on from 2017 Russia were even carried out. The latest sanctions are thoroughly bogus theater and will have no effect what-so-ever.

This is your "proxy war?"

Jesus Christ. Trump troll trump trolls.
"Someday America will learn that arming extremist and fascist religious rebels is not a good idea, even when they pinky swear to be on your side."

Yeah, but they get all indignant and start threatening armed rebellion when reasonable gun control measures are suggested, so what can you do?
@2 Catalina Vel-DuRay: You are a treasure.
@3 Dan the Man: We love you too!
@4 seatackled:; I second that.
@17 & @20: Thank you.
@43 blip: Agreed, and largely why I avoid Twitter.
@48 Knat: Agreed. *sigh*
Dr. Zaius, it is not even remotely controversial that the US is involved in proxy wars with Russia in the Middle East and that this is part of the NATO build up in Europe. Several countries in the Middle East right now is involved in conflicts between KSA and Iran for hegemony, the most famous being the slaughter in Yemen right now, but this also includes disputes in Qatar, Lebanon, Palestine, parts of Iraq, and (recently) Egypt. The US is on KSA's side and Russia is on Iran's. This is very basic Middle East 101 knowledge, and it's the background for the Syrian Civil War (which if you haven't heard of it, has been going on for years and involves a hell of a lot more than just lobbing missiles). This predates Trump, who, if anything, has been taking an increasingly harder stance against Russia/Iran since about the fourth month of his presidency and who has been going out of his way to increase ties with KSA, including the PR trip and whirlwind tour of the military-industrial complex that MBS just wrapped up to celebrate the billions upon billions of dollars in weapons deals that Trump made with him a few months back.

There is literally no sane way anyone can interpret any of this within the context of Trump being a puppet for Putin, and it mostly reveals how an absence of knowledge can create a void that any cult/conspiracy theory/political party can fill with any nonsense at all.
Tax cuts for rich people and scapegoating minorities top the list for contemporary conservative values, which is why Trump’s approval rating among republicans hovers around the 80-90% range. If “acting” like a mentally unstable person is a negotiating tactic it’s not working out so well for him because his agenda has been a series of failures - except of course for the tax cuts.
I don’t have an opinion either way on whether or not Assad used chemical weapons either this time or when Obama said he did but he has used them in the past and he would use them again if it served his side. I'm not an Assad apologist, the man is a brutal force. However, other groups in Syria including the rebels have used them as well. When Obama said he did, there was little evidence that he did. I don’t believe the conspiracy theory that the US did it in order to get us involved in that war officially. I think it’s more likely that someone used them (no one knows who, maybe it was Assad) and Obama took that opportunity to ask for war. When he found out that Congress would not give authorization, he decided not to go. Whether or not what is happening right now is the same, only time will tell. It doesn't really made sense for Assad to use them now that he is so close to winning- it's better to think who benefits, and who would benefit from a US intervention? Certainly anti-Assad groups who are losing right now. But he could've used them just because he's secure that the US won't really escalate into global war, I have no idea.

But what we know for sure is that the US is not truly interested in defending people or spreading democracy. The US is literally propping up a dictator in KSA and assisting them in a genocide in Yemen. If the US goes to full on war with Syria, it will be to maintain a presence there now that Assad has mostly won- the US prefers maintaining a hegemony even at the expense of a functioning state to loss of hegemony to Russia/Iran - we've seen that in Iran, Libya, Yemen and Egypt now. And I’m sure there is some strategy regarding the change in stance around Turkey as well that currently eludes me. I’m sure this has to do with the pulling out of the Iran deal and the escalations in the West Bank. Plus Bolton and that wing of the GOP have been wanting this war for a long time now, and the recent sanction increase and NATO buildup show that it was in the works before the chemical attacks. It's terrifying.

What’s happening is that all these conflicts are coming to a head and we have mad men in power now who actually want to court war with Putin, Assad and Iran. It’s absolutely foolishness and will lead to WW3 if these people have their way. This is why it's very important for liberals to wake up and stop thinking that everything is so simplistic as pee tapes and porn stars. You are a laughing stock and you need to focus now and hold the Democrats’ feet to the fire. They can stop this escalation, but they need you liberals to start paying attention.
Oh, that comment above was to Theodore @14
wtf. One day his attorney gets busted, next day he's starting a war with Russia. Nice knowing you guys.
"What’s happening is that all these conflicts are coming to a head and we have mad men in power now who actually want to court war with Putin, Assad and Iran. "

We have mad men in power, alright. However, the idea that is all some escalation that will lead to a direct military confrontation with Russia is absurd. Just absurd. John Bolton may want a war with Iran but it's not in proxy to Russia or Putin. It's in Proxy to Israel.

I guarantee you Putin would be absolutely deeeee-lighted to the see US engaged in another resource wasting ground war in the ME. Just like our last disastrous foray. This what he WANTS. russia in no way desires any military confrontation with he US. They would lose and they know it.

Trump absolutely is absolutely wagging the dog with contrived theater with these supposed attacks on Russian forces.

You understand the type of Tomahawk missiles (TLAMs) he used to bomb the Syrian Al Shayrat airfield in April of last year were utterly ineffective for taking out airstrips and fortified bunkers. you do not use TLAM's for hardened targets or airfields, ever. We'd use bombers - like B-2 Spirit stealth - with 2,000lb "bunker busters" or JDAMs, for those targets. It what we used everywhere previously for those kinds of targets. As we did in Lybia and Iraq.

The Trump administration called ahead to make sure there were no personal, equipment, ammunition, or aircraft on that field. It was complete theater.

Just as he has done with this tweet. For an attack that never occurred.

Trumps complicity with Putin's Thug State couldn't be more starkly revealed other than, of course, his money laundering.
BTW. Again the 2017 sanctions on Putin were never implemented. Never. The most recent sanctions also have meat at all - they are sanctions on the FSB, for fuck sake - and have yet to be implemented. The only thing we did was expelled a bunch of known spies.

If Trump was supposedly getting more "aggressive" towards Russia then why did he give can the two Russian spy compounds in Pioneer Point, Maryland back? You know. the ones Obama's sanctions seized from the Russians in 2016.

The hawks you speak of wanted those compounds closed a decade ago. But there they are. On the fringes of DC filled with Russians.

Trump not only gave those back, but apologized.

There has not been one serious sanction against Putin anthill close to the sanctions we've imposed on Iran or Iraq at various times. Not even close.
And there is this:
"Trump Administration Made Secret Efforts To Ease Russia Sanctions.""

And this:
""Sanctions for Russian oligarchs unlikely to seriously impact Putin, experts say.""

And this:
""Trump administration considers easing some sanctions on Russia""

And on and on. I mean. Seriously. The idea that Trump has any record of being aggressive towards Russia is just fucking laughable and easily disproven.
I'm really confused by your response and am not sure if you understand what proxy means? It's when two forces with major disputes fight it out by supporting different sides of a conflict that does not pit them against one another directly. This is exactly what is going on in Syria, has been since the first half of the Obama admin, and you seem to be thinking this is some controversial interpretation rather than a widely acknowledged statement of fact? The Assad regime is backed by Putin and the Russian military and intelligence- it's the reason the US does not escalate into regime change (or else one of them). The FSA is nearly wholly funded and organized by the US- it's the only reason Assad does not have complete control of the country. You keep talking about launching tomahawks which is weird- that is one tiny incident in a larger war that's been going on for years now. The part that confuses me is I can't figure out if you are trying to make some different point or if you literally don't know that the Syrian Civil War has been going on for years with the US on one side and Russia on the other? Or if you are confused what proxy means? Yes, the US and Russia have both had direct military involvement in the war, but they've been careful to avoid directly fighting one another as that would change it from a proxy war to all out WW3 which is the whole point- and again, not a new policy that started with Trump- and I'd like to think they'd continue to avoid attacking one another but I'm never sure with these freaks. As for Iran, yes Bolton wants war there- that's the whole point. The US and Russia are ALREADY involved in proxy disputes throughout the region- Russia through its support of Iran and US through its support of KSA, and those two nations are in fact in fighting over hegemony in most of the region, namely in Yemen. Bolton who has taken an aggressive stance against Iran and Russia over the years, absolutely wants to escalate this conflict, another region which (if he did so) would lead us closer to direct war with Russia. What I can't follow is the conspiracy theory logic that leads to the US and Russia both investing so much money, weapons, logistics etc into proxy wars around the region with one another when really it's all a phony war (destroyed states, humanitarian crises, billions in weapons deals) made up to wag the dog. The sanctions are more complicated than you are presenting, again without any history, and I'm too tired to talk about it right now. But never fear, I'm nothing if not long-winded and will no doubt have the energy in the next few days.
BTW, I'm rereading and still trying to see what I'm misunderstanding about your point here. You claim it's delusional that there is a proxy war but all your talking points seem to be about how the US has gone out of its way not to engage directly in any actions that could kill Russians which is exactly the point of a proxy war. So I'm not sure what you are trying to say. And that is also the context for why the recent statements are alarming. Now we can dispute whether or not Trump is blustering and to what extent Bolton might want to heat things up- alright that's all fine. But I don't get how you are coming from the point of view that there is no proxy war or that it somehow serves Putin's interest to escalate that proxy war (which yes, can be done without intending to start WW3 and which yes can escalate into actual war for regime change) or how any of this fits into a narrative of Putin pulling the strings.
This man is evil, why is it taking so long. He knows he's so cooked. And look at his arrogance, no shame about any of it. And the whole world suffers because of this one sick fuck.
EL I’m refuting your claim that Trump has been increasingly aggressive towards Russia. He hasn’t. It was all theater. I am refuting your claim that this “proxy” war will lead to some world ending conflagration with Russia. It won’t. The Cold War era idea of proxy conflict is not what is happening now. It’s not two competing strategic interests with two different world views looking to win a specific conflict. This is a collection of interests of a half a dozen players.

We are a pseudo proxy for Israel, and at times they us, in a battle with Iran. But Israel is also acting against us when it suits them and even sides with Russia.

Russia has interests in Syria and makes money supplanting our sanctions to Iran. But our building war posture there is against Iran. Not Russia. And will not lead to a confrontation with Russia.

Russia would like nothing better than for us to put MORE troops on the ground and allow our selves to drawn into protracted conflict with Iran. If that happens Russian military involvement will go back to selling arms. That’s what they want to do.

In fact as of today the air strikes in Syria were again total theater on empty warehouses. Nobody was killed. And the sanctions on Russia announced by Hailey on Friday were just scrapped today by Trump. There is no building anti-Russian aggression.

So this narrative you’ve bought into that the anti-Russian hawks are stearing us to war with Russia is absurd. That is what I refute. There are no anti-Russian hawks in the Trump administration. There are anti-Iranian hawks.

I’d would also like to point out that Putin’s inner circle is also heavily invested in Israel and do significant business with Netanyahu. Russia’s bombing of civilian neighborhoods in Syria driving refugees by the millions into the EU was a deliberate act to destabilize the EU, build sympathy with white nationalism which Putin orchestrates and done in such a way to direct refugees away from Israel.

Ultimately Russia does not care about Iran or Israel or Syria. All they care about is that our strategic interests are checked without costing them very much and building arms clients.