The Article is about President Trump sharing Information with Russia that he did not have permission to share. You narrowed that down to the Optics of a US President being Social with Russian Officials. even admitting he said more than he should have, however you attempted to excuse it as well as disregard it as “logical” cooperation. My reply pushed it back into the broader context, to which you claim is veering off topic, even though you did not refute a single point I had made. Although you did attempt to excuse and defend it again. It is interesting that to avoid my point you instead chose to broaden the discussion drastically to avoid the very simple optics I was discussing in my reply. Shall we discuss as you wished? Absolutely.
“ Mr. Pace, the optics I’m referring to are the images published by the TASS photographer showing Trump laughing and being friendly with Lavrov and Kislyak, a situation completely at odds with the acrimonious relationship the Establishment media wants to present to Americans and the world. You obviously missed that point and instead veered off into the intelligence agencies and Trump’s bad points, so I’ll go there with you.”
I completely understand which optics you are narrowly focusing on Mr. Freeman. What you failed to grasp is that your narrow focus on those optics while ignoring the larger one is the opposite of a rather worthless coin. The other side is those who are focusing solely upon the optics of him being friendly during their discussion just because they are Russian. Neither point has any relevance, and both are equally pointless in the broader context. As for the Establishment Media you are so very focused upon, I would suggest that perhaps you should broaden your Media Browsing to include other sources. ALL American Media is based upon Ratings and thus sensationalized, and many now play Partisan Politics. Just picking the opposite position of that does not make it correct, nor add any validity to it.
“ The rest of my post was not “white noise”, Mr. Pace, but information very relevant to the situation at hand. Britain, France, Israel and Jordan are all countries who are supposedly in the “anti-ISIS coalition”, but if you have been keeping up with events in Syria since it started in 2011, you will be smart enough to know that ISIS made it’s largest territorial gains and advances while this “anti-ISIS coalition” was supposedly actively fighting against them. ISIS took Mosul, Ramadi, Aleppo, Palmyra and very large swaths of land, all under attack by this massive “anti-ISIS coalition”. Maybe the collective intelligence agencies of these powerful countries couldn’t see that ISIS was taking over large chunks of Iraq and Syria?”
First, this has nothing to do with President Trump sharing Intelligence Information given in Confidence to the US with Russia without Consent. Second, I have followed the situation in Syria. It would seem you have restricted yourself to getting your information solely from US Media Outlets given this response. You either are completely ignoring, or ignorant of what those Intelligence Services had concluded. They concluded that in order to defeat Daesh, they would have to allow them to expand. They did not know who was running their operations, as well as given the resentment in the Middle East towards the Western Powers we would have a difficult time trying to wage direct war, and it would be very costly in terms of lives. Given their strategy, it was decided to allow them to expand their line rapidly as they trying to do. This would allow their leaders to feel secure and expose themselves, thus allowing them to be tagged and targeted. It would also allow for one of the most common historical military mistakes to be made by Daesh, conquering to much to fast. Their lines would be spread to thin, and they would not have had the time to pacify their conquered territory. This makes it much easier to break their lines, and also have the support of the native populace as they are not happy about being conquered. Given that they started out Saudi funded and armed, and Turkish trained to fight Modern Militaries, including ours, and were trained to self fund it would have created a very long term problem to allow their leaders to stay in hiding by waging direct war immediately. Turkey was still allowing supply lines to go through their Nation at that time, as Saudi Arabia and Turkey both wished to have the other Wahhabi Extremist destroyed. Which is better, expose their Leadership, and have a stable populace supporting you when destroying them, or attack blindly when the people still hate you and the Leadership can just slip away and start over again and again?
“ It wasn’t until the Russians entered Syria in 2015 that ISIS started suffering major defeats, losing territory and being pushed into retreat. The fact of the matter is that the four nations you mention have as their primary goal the overthrow of Assad in Syria, NOT the defeat of ISIS. Trump saying that he wanted to work with Russia to defeat ISIS is not a goal any of the “anti-ISIS coalition” countries want because ISIS and the other jihadists are the proxy army slated to overthrow the Syrian government.”
Interesting you are giving Russia the sole credit for them being pushed back. You are also ignoring much of the Regions Geo Political issues. Iran is backing Assad because they feel a Sunni Government there would isolate them further, however, they also want Daesh destroyed because they fear the Extremist Wahhabism they are founded on. They offered to ally with the US and spend their soldiers blood fighting Daesh, but the US refused. So they allied with Russia and Syria, as well as Iraq against the US wishes. Jordan wishes Daesh destroyed for the same reason the Iranian’s and everyone else does, the Extremist Wahhabi that dominates them. However, while Jordan is working with us, they are much more tied to Russia for economic reasons. Jordan does not much care what happens to Assad, he is Shiite, so they wouldn’t be sorry to see him go, but their Military is fighting Daesh. Israel wishes to see both Assad and Daesh go, as both wish to see them destroyed. So they have a good reason for that. France and Britain wish to see Assad go because of the War Crimes he commits against his own people, they also wish to see Daesh destroyed. They have a very personal reason for that, and it is their primary focus. Daesh can get militants to their Nations to retaliate, and it has. They are trying to get more there. So it is in their best interest to fight Daesh. Now enters the two wild cards. The US. Our interest is maintaining a stable region if possible because many there hate us, and we like oil. Self Serving, yes. We had difficulty entering more than we did because of our very polarized Politics between the Parties. We backed Rebel groups who yes wish to oust Assad, but also would fight Daesh. This angered Turkey who finally entered the war to stop them. They attack Daesh, and closed the supply routes, but also are attacking the Rebel Groups we back because they are opposed to the Kurds. Russia entered for self serving reasons as well. The Arab Spring cost them Billions from pending Arms deals when Gaddafi fell. So they looked for another ally, which was Syria. It also gave them a chance to test their new Military in a Theatre of their own choosing, as well as show off the Military Equipment they are selling. Their other reason resembles Europe’s. The Muslims that have left Russia have gone to Syria. and they have either joined Daesh, or most common is the Rebels fighting Assad and Daesh. Russia does not want them back, so they also attack the Rebel Groups we are backing because they fear what will happen if they return home. Daesh, due to how far they had expanded, could not maintain their lines and they broke, just as planned. The issue is now that so many nations are fighting for opposite goals. Russia, Iran, and Syria are on one team, Turkey is its own team, and our allies and the US are the last team. All Fighting Daesh, but working against the other teams. If the US supports Russia’s Team, then we abandon our Allies and fight against their interest. You apparently either think it would be wise to abandon our Allies in favor of Russia, and it must not bother you that Russia will not allow Assad to fall, and thus we would have to support Regime that Commits War Crimes against its own people.
“ The goal of the Establishment is to overthrow Assad in Syria, split Iraq and Syria into smaller, pro-Western states that will make room for our designs on that regions resources. Russia represents a direct obstacle to this happening, and this is the only reason NATO is amassing troops on Russia’s western borders, why Putin is being continuously demonized, why the Establishment is so upset with Trump’s seeming desire to have friendly relations with Russia. It’s about geopolitical dominance, and Russia represents a barrier to it.”
Due to its Geographical location the Middle East is closer to Russia than the US. Russia would like to see the US withdraw completely from the Middle East, which would mean we abandon our Allies there. And for optics, what happens when you betray an Ally and work against their Interest? Nothing good, nor do other Allies trust you. As for the Nato Russian borders, the area most in concern Lithuania, Estonia etc, has 4000 Nato troops, because Russia placed 330,000 on their side. Russia is having Domestic Issues, and their Military Buildup is an attempt to boost their Economy, as well as distract their Populace from the issues. They have also been showing aggression with Military Crossovers into other Nations, as well as the issues with Crimea. Not an attempt to start a war, but more to boost morale at home. However, Treaties are treaties and thus Nato has to station troops on those borders in case this goes from simple bravado to outright aggression. Russia is trying to be a World Player again, and hopes to boost their economy. I wish them luck. That being said, they can do it in other ways. This is about Geopolitical dominance. Russia wishes to take some of ours for themselves. The Establishment you are so opposed to wishes us all to be on the same page, and in that regard your are correct Russia stands in the Way. However, the alternative is that each Nation should work towards its own interest first as President Trump claims, which again Russia stands in the way. Russia does not need to be an enemy, but they are not our ally either. They are working towards their own interest first, and we stand in their way. There is also the little issue of Assad, given his actions towards his own people cannot be tolerated. Unless you are a fan of crematoriums as he is.
“ Neither Britain, France, Israel or Jordan are actually interested in getting rid of ISIS, so is their valued intelligence “secrets” actually that valuable? I’m sure the Russians are already aware that our allies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar are providing funding and arms to the jihadists, they don’t need intelligence from Israel to see that. Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden both have mentioned this so it’s not a mystery who is keeping ISIS fighting and chopping heads.”
Funny thing that Saudi Arabia learned, when you use extremist to fight a proxy war, they always turn on you. As for the rest I have already covered that, but I will leave a final point. If Jane Doe is a close friend, and she tells you a secret, but makes you promise not to tell anyone, especially John Doe, what is going to happen with that relationship when you tell John Doe? Think she would be happy? Think she would understand that you did it for your own reasons? Nope. She is not going to trust you anymore, nor are any of your other friends since you can’t keep your mouth shut. Which is the entire point here, and the optics that are being discussed outside of American Outlets. It is also the point which you have gone very far out of your way to avoid. Have a Good Day.