Giving any money to Iran is supporting terrorism and their nuclear program. The missile strikes that he ordered against ISIS were simply an attempt to show Americans that he was"doing something."
If this were not true howcould Trump nearlydestroythem within a yearwhile Obama messed with them for much longer?
Trump didn't "destroy" ISIS. The Russian military, the SAA, Iraqi Security Forces, and a large number of militias and rebel factions have all been chipping away at them for years. They have enjoyed coalition air support in their efforts against ISIS under Obama and Trump alike; the fact that ISIS is at it's weakest during Trump's administration isn't so much because of any special effort on his part as it is because of his timing.
Pretty much , yeah, but the fact is most non-Iraqi forces in the fight have been Iranian, and the Shiite, whose militias they support, are ancestrally Iranian, as are also the Kurds.
As with the Albania and Bosnia vs Serbia wars, Iran does a lot of what US hands are to tied to do, so we look the other way, while calling such support once no longer needed, "sponsoring terrorism"
The only true Arabs are in Saudi Arabia, with some thinly spread throughout the region. But most people called Arabs aren't. The story goes that supposedly Lebanon, like most of those other countries, was created by the Brits and France out of land taken from Turkey in WWI over dinner by drawing lines on a napin with no concern for ethnicities, tribes, religion, etc. So Lebanese as an identity didn't exist before then.
Most Shiite are Iranian or of ethnic Iranian descent. The official story was that it was a a result of the schism between Ali and Hussein after Mohammed died, but in reality Zoroastrians basically readapted Islam to fit them. So Shiites generally are of Persian blood.
Do you have any good sources on that? It sounds like a fun read :)
As for my comment on Lebanon, I refer to them as a distinct ethnicity because (so far as I am aware) most Lebanese people are more likely of a Phoenician ancestry than one more closely tied to Arabs or Indo-Iranians.
Maybe that was because of the intel that the Bush Administration gathered? But you're probably right, Bush couldn't make it happen and Obama did. Thatwas the highest point in his presidency and from there on it just got worse until he was finally gone.
Intel that Bin Laden was hiding in Bora Bora since 1996?
During 9/11/11?
When the US went to war in Afganistan?
Despite the intel, Bush not only refused to send troops, planes, anything there to seek him out, he refused to have the area attacked at all. Hell, couple of days after 9/11, there was one, ONE plane in our skies - Air Force 1 flying members of Bib Laden's F-A-M-I-L-Y outta here and into safety back in Saudi Arabia.
Same went as when Bin Laden 'escaped' American occupied Afganistan into Pakistan - the Taliban HQ - the Bush Admin 'didn't' notice. And yet STILL the US pumps billions of dollars to aid that cesspool of a fake country.
TWO years AFTER Bush was out of office? Dafuq was Bush waiting for? The Golden Anniversary?
PS: Wasn't Trump supposed to cut off aid to Pakistan, as he said he would for the gazziolionth time? Part of that aid is funneled directly to the Taliban and other terrorist orgs in Pakistan. Remove that money, their terrorism ends.
In fact, skip the Iran distraction propaganda nonsense. Subtract Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey (all Sunni enemies of Iran, btw), and ALL problems in the Middle East - in fact, in the entire Islamic spere (minus Israel's and Iran's own internal problems) - cease.
Unless we keep prodding them as we have. But you still can't buy arms and distribute arms without funding, so game over.
In the vacuum left by Al Queda being extirpated by Obama (after Bush failed to do so in 2 terms), remants of Iraq's post war decomissioned army's generals and soldiers formed ISIL. So in that sense, your lie is sorta almost quasi correct.
In response, Obama reluctantly sent troops back into a country he ran and won on promising to get our soldiers out of, joining Russian and Iranian forces. In fact, along with Iranian backed Shia militia and Kurdish Peshmerga, the country with the most soldiers on the ground helping Iraqis route ISIL was and is Iran, not the USA or Russia. By the time Trump took office, ISIL was almost over in Iraq.
You sincerely think Trump managed to do what 2 preceding Presidents over 2 terms over 1.5 decades didn't finish in a mere months? Um, how?
ISIL's leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed by a Russia airstrike in Syria. The few ISIL terrorists are still there. What did Trump do, other than bomb a small plane in an airport last year to thumb Assad in the nose and announce he was leaving just before he changed his mind to wag the dog now?
Not only that, as Turkey attacks our Kurdish allies - the most dedicated, loyal, and self sacrificing of any people to the USA in the Middle East, Trump has abandoned them.
Feel free to state what imaginary thing Alex Jones told you Trump has accomplished in the region other than take credit for saying what he did was yuge.
Except when it comes to paranormal stuff. They regularly decide it is "false" even though they have "mixture", "unproven", and "legend" as conclusion options.
As for political stuff, they do show a distinct bias. However, you can not find any news site without a distinct bias anymore. Most news sites will have their facts (numbers, statistics, quotes, ect.) correct, but the facts that they emphasize and the conclusions they draw will vary greatly (and this is just print media).
It gets worse when you get to televised media, and the "impartial moderator" talks over the guest speaker they disagree with (I'm looking at you CNN and FOX).
Considering that they used evidence from 8 years ago in a recent post claiming that guns actually do kill more people than cars, baseball bats, and everything else that all other statistics show do kill more than guns, I think that they may just be a bit biased.
