Trump aide McMaster - Time for tough talks with Russia

[webfact]

Trump aide McMaster - Time for tough talks with Russia

REUTERS

 

U.S. President Donald Trump and his newly appointed National Security Adviser Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster (L) speak during the announcement at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida U.S. February 20, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - White House national security adviser H. R. McMaster said on Sunday it was time for tough talks with Russia over its support for Syria's government and its "subversive" actions in Europe.

 

Speaking on ABC News' "This Week" programme, McMaster said Russia's backing of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government has perpetuated a civil war and created a crisis that has bled over into Iraq, neighbouring countries and Europe.

 

"So Russia's support for that kind of horrible regime, that is a party to that kind of a conflict, is something that has to be drawn into question as well as Russia's subversive actions in Europe," McMaster said. "And so I think it's time though, now, to have those tough discussions Russia."

 

The United States early this month bombed a Syrian air base in reaction to what Washington said was a nerve gas attack by the Assad government that killed at least 70 people in rebel-held territory.

 

Syria denies it carried out the attack and Russia has warned that the cruise missile strikes could have "extremely serious" consequences. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson visited Moscow last week as tensions grew.

 

"Well, when relations are at the lowest point, there's nowhere to go but up. So I think the secretary's visit to Russia was perfectly timed," McMaster said.

 

A January U.S. intelligence report on Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election said that Russia also has sought to influence elections across Europe.

 

Current and former U.S. official and analysts say Moscow has targeted elections in France, Germany and elsewhere through a combination of propaganda, cyber hacking, funding of candidates and other means with the overall goal of weakening the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the trans-Atlantic alliance.  

 

(Reporting by Lucia Mutikani and Warren Strobel; Editing by Richard Chang)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-04-17

[PremiumLane]

Pot calling the kettle black

[craigt3365]

10 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

Pot calling the kettle black

I'd say Russia does need to take action in Syria.  Enough with the bombing of innocent civilians.  The entire western world is against this.  As they are with Russia's occupation of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, etc.  All denounced by the western world.

[ilostmypassword]

49 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I'd say Russia does need to take action in Syria.  Enough with the bombing of innocent civilians.  The entire western world is against this.  As they are with Russia's occupation of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, etc.  All denounced by the western world.

Another case of selective indignation. 

[craigt3365]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Another case of selective indignation. 

So you are saying the US has taken territory from sovereign nations, killed civilians in the process, and occupied that land?  Really?

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

So you are saying the US has taken territory from sovereign nations, killed civilians in the process, and occupied that land?  Really?

USA Saudi Arabia Yemen. Any of these words ring any bells?

[boomerangutang]

54 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I'd say Russia does need to take action in Syria.  Enough with the bombing of innocent civilians.  The entire western world is against this.  As they are with Russia's occupation of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, etc.  All denounced by the western world.

                                Trump doesn't have problems with Russia taking Ukrainian territory.  In an interview, Trump didn't even know Russians had done that.   Trump has not said one non-praising thing about Russia in the past 2 years.

 

                  McMaster looks and talks tough, but he's a water carrier for Trump.  He says Russia shouldn't interfere with European elections, but doesn't mention anything about Russia's interference in US elections.   What a two-faced pit bull with a tight leash held by you-know-who.

[craigt3365]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

USA Saudi Arabia Yemen. Any of these words ring any bells?

The USA invaded SA and Yemen and has taken territory from these nations?  Really?  Please show a link.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, boomerangutang said:

                                Trump doesn't have problems with Russia taking Ukrainian territory.  In an interview, Trump didn't even know Russians had done that.   Trump has not said one non-praising thing about Russia in the past 2 years.

Trump's worried about the Russian connections he, his family, and his associates have.  Not to mention the disaster during the last elections.  Seems Trump is changing course on Russia.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/14/politics/trump-china-russia/index.html

Quote

Trump dumps Russia, woos China instead

 

[sujoop]

 

It's all in the timing - very telling Tweet by the distractor in Chief:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump

6:16 AM - 13 Apr 2017

Things will work out fine between the U.S.A. and Russia.
At the right time everyone will come to their senses & there will be lasting peace!
 

 

 

 

"Lovers' quarrels are hard, even when they're just for show"

(recommend following Evan McMullin on Trump/Putin watch:)

 

Some of the comments resonate:
-He says "at the right time" like he is still waiting for a signal from Putin. Remember, like during the campaign.
-Interesting how the news seems to buy this Trump/Putin quarrel as a big split and proof that there is no collusion. "Sad"

-this "public fight" with Russia is sure helping trump's biggest political problem at home...

-We started a pool for how long it will take Trump to lift the sanctions.

-Prediction: Putin takes care of Assad, Trump lifts sanctions on Russia. Voilà BFF's again.

----------------------

 

PROBLEM:

1) Putin can't get Trump to lift sanctions on Russia because of all the heat and public perception surrounding Russia/WH ties.

2) Trump's historical approval #s are in the toilet (which he REALLY hates, also when people USED to refer to 'President Bannon', or losing the popular vote, or low inauguration #s, or comments about small hands, etc, etc..;)

 

SOLUTION:
WAG THE DOG - Create an instant FIX to cover both issues - provide the 'appearance' of a dramatic Trump/Putin split (with a few old planes scrapped, air field intact, Russia told in advance of strike timing)  plus give Trump's all time low approval #s a bump all in one go.

 

THE LONGER GAME:
After successfully staging this public break-up Putin now has breathing room to maneuver back towards this goal - REMOVING THE SANCTIONS. Thus, after fortifying with follow-up of further diplomatic spats for public appearance, look for team Trump to eventually announce a 'sudden break-through agreement' with Putin no longer favouring Assad, in exchange for removal of sanctions.

 

FOOTNOTE:
Putin still defacto controls Syria no matter what (of course)

 

CAVEAT:
In the meantime, if the FBI or other drops a real bombshell on Trump/Putin-gate, or if Flynn or others start singing, all bets are off.
 

TBC:
Regardless, with his fragile ego, narcissist man-child Trump will continue to cause major blunders which will require ongoing and possibly much larger distractions.Thus other more dangerous flash points will follow, absolutely no doubt. At least with Putin pulling the strings we have some assurance of a calculated and 'somewhat' contained plan by a proven and cunning adversary. However, a novice, naive and vain Trump wagging the dog solely on his own whimsy (with high potential for exponential consequences) is an even more disturbing  prospect.

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

The USA invaded SA and Yemen and has taken territory from these nations?  Really?  Please show a link.

It's interesting how convenient your indignation is. Your starting point was this: "I'd say Russia does need to take action in Syria.  Enough with the bombing of innocent civilians.  The entire western world is against this.  As they are with Russia's occupation of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, etc.  All denounced by the western world."

Apparently "bombing of innocent civilians" hits too inconveniently close to home to count.

[PremiumLane]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

So you are saying the US has taken territory from sovereign nations, killed civilians in the process, and occupied that land?  Really?

Iraq for a start? Look at the history of coups backs by the US for another point.. I could go on :)

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

It's interesting how convenient your indignation is. Your starting point was this: "I'd say Russia does need to take action in Syria.  Enough with the bombing of innocent civilians.  The entire western world is against this.  As they are with Russia's occupation of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, etc.  All denounced by the western world."

Apparently "bombing of innocent civilians" hits too inconveniently close to home to count.

And you replied with Saudi Arabia and Yemen!   Where is the US bombing innocent civilians now?  And don't say Syria.

 

Be nice or don't post.

[craigt3365]

44 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

Iraq for a start? Look at the history of coups backs by the US for another point.. I could go on :)

The US has not taken territory from Iraq.  You need to do some research on this...so please, do not go on.  And Iraq was a long time ago.  Not really part of what's happening today.  Though I admit, it was a cluster F-.  Not part of this topic.

[Destiny1990]

Putin and Trump is 4 hands on the same belly.

without Putin his assistance Trump would never have won the elections.

[PremiumLane]

44 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

The US has not taken territory from Iraq.  You need to do some research on this...so please, do not go on.  And Iraq was a long time ago.  Not really part of what's happening today.  Though I admit, it was a cluster F-.  Not part of this topic.

It was an illegal war and invasion, not much else to add to that. Iraq is still happening and is a complete basket case due to the actions of the US and allies. Also, that invasion laid the ground work for the mess we now find ourselves in, it created ISIS for a start. 

[craigt3365]

10 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

It was an illegal war and invasion, not much else to add to that. Iraq is still happening and is a complete basket case due to the actions of the US and allies. Also, that invasion laid the ground work for the mess we now find ourselves in, it created ISIS for a start. 

But has the US taken territory?  No doubt a mess, and a huge failure, but no land was taken and now occupied. 

[PremiumLane]

4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

But has the US taken territory?  No doubt a mess, and a huge failure, but no land was taken and now occupied. 

the US has set up bases all around the region, and bombs with impunity, so can't see the difference really - just nit picking to say have they taken territory, don't you think? 

[craigt3365]

6 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

the US has set up bases all around the region, and bombs with impunity, so can't see the difference really - just nit picking to say have they taken territory, don't you think? 

Ummm...there's a huge difference between bombing a civilian population, moving troops in, and taking over.  Versus what the US is doing with bases.  They are there by invitation of the foreign government.  The US can, and does, get kicked out from time to time.  Research what happened in the Philippines.  So no, not nit picking.  Apples and oranges.

[Kiwiken]

10 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

So you are saying the US has taken territory from sovereign nations, killed civilians in the process, and occupied that land?  Really?

Over the past century that would be a yes . Not counting territory ceased in world wars

[ilostmypassword]

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Ummm...there's a huge difference between bombing a civilian population, moving troops in, and taking over.  Versus what the US is doing with bases.  They are there by invitation of the foreign government.  The US can, and does, get kicked out from time to time.  Research what happened in the Philippines.  So no, not nit picking.  Apples and oranges.

Currently the US is giving support to the Saudis who have repeatedly bombed hospitals and civilian populations in Yemen.  And the Russians are "taking over" in Syria? Really?

[connda]

In retrospect, all of the disenfranchised voters could have just voted for HRC.  The outcome would have been the same.  

[craigt3365]

10 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

Over the past century that would be a yes . Not counting territory ceased in world wars

How about sticking to the past 50 years or so.  Ancient history can bring up a can of worms for many countries.

[craigt3365]

7 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Currently the US is giving support to the Saudis who have repeatedly bombed hospitals and civilian populations in Yemen.  And the Russians are "taking over" in Syria? Really?

It's not only the US who's supporting SA.  Others are supporting Yemen.  It's a mess.   My reference to "taking over" wasn't towards Syria.  You can see what I posted above.