Our Guy Flynn

[Smitty-48]

I mean, all these leaks, these are not coming from the Democrats, the Democrats control nothing, they're out of the loop, the most damage right now, is coming from within the ranks of the GOP, John McCain is the nemesis here, not Nancy Pelosi, so Trump needs to make peace with Red Team, at which point, Blue Team will be irrelevant, at least until they can take one of the Houses back.

[Smitty-48]

I disagree with the premise. There is absolutely no majority of "interventionists" in America, that I'm aware of. I have yet to meet anyone hyped up to send troops to the Middle East, or Africa.

I'd like to see some sources for this opinion.

Dude no non-interventionist are getting elected. People only elect intervention because they prefer intervention. If they weren't a majority of interventionists in America than way more politicians would be sounding like Ron Paul to get elected, but they aren't. They play the tough on terror card instead, because that obviously works better than the non-intervention card. You just wish your fellow American's agree with you on foreign policy, they don't. You are misfit toy, the rest don't think the way that you do.

Americans just try to redefine Neoconservative to mean whatever they want it to mean, so they can then disavow it and point fingers at someone, blame leviathan, it's not us, it's those "Neocons" over there, meanwhile, almost everybody in America upholds the central tenants of Neoconservatism, except for the far Left and far Right, but as much as the broadly Neoconservative Center would like to front when it suits them, most people are undercover bitch hacks for the Neoconservatives within either Red Team or Blue Team, it's laughable when people talk about the "Duopoly" as if they themselves are not part of it.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I disagree with the premise. There is absolutely no majority of "interventionists" in America, that I'm aware of. I have yet to meet anyone hyped up to send troops to the Middle East, or Africa.

I'd like to see some sources for this opinion.

Dude no non-interventionist are getting elected. People only elect intervention because they prefer intervention. If they weren't a majority of interventionists in America than way more politicians would be sounding like Ron Paul to get elected, but they aren't. They play the tough on terror card instead, because that obviously works better than the non-intervention card. You just wish your fellow American's agree with you on foreign policy, they don't. You are misfit toy, the rest don't think the way that you do.

This is one of those instances where you either 1) Have no idea how America works, or 2) Are playing dumb for effect.

There IS no option for a 'non-interventionist' candidate in any race. The choice is simply not presented to us. We might get a shout-out on the campaign trail from time to time, but it is never considered as an actual issue. We don't even see the candidates until our 2 Annointed Parties select them from us, out of the hordes. We get speeches about taxes, God, and racism, and that's about it. Then nothing changes.

You may not want to think about this too deeply, but our gigantic, world-destroying military has been under the control of an autopilot system for many decades now. The actual population just laughs at the foolishness, and ignores it for the most part.

The Presidential Primary caucus thing is pretty cool, but it's one barely-populated state in the midwest. And I don't think anyone has ever seen 10+ candidates up there on stage before. That's what was so bizarre about this year - before the Orange Buffoon entered the race.

[ssu]

Seems that Flynn raised emotions in the Trump team far earlier than this episode with the telephone calls to the Russian ambassador. Likely the thing a been brewing for some time.

In the weeks before the Russia scandal, a series of leaks suggested that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and CIA Director Mike Pompeo had lost confidence in Flynn and were holding private meetings expressly designed to exclude him. In a move first reported by Politico, the CIA — with Pompeo’s blessing --- blocked a key Flynn aide from receiving the high-level security clearance he needed to work on the National Security Council (NSC).

Staffers on the NSC, meanwhile, had been privately telling reporters that Flynn wasn’t fulfilling one of the most important part of his job: making sure complex national security policy changes moves were vetted with Cabinet members and other key officials before being presented to the president. Other NSC staffers had begun using encrypted communications because of fears that Flynn and his deputies were monitoring their cellphones and emails to find leakers.

See here

Or this one, from another article...

Bannon and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who now serves as a senior adviser, reportedly held a meeting with Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson, Mattis and Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo to better coordinate the administration. A portion of the meeting was purposefully scheduled to discuss concerns over Flynn, according to a New York Times report.

See here

[Smitty-48]

This is one of those instances where you either 1) Have no idea how America works, or 2) Are playing dumb for effect.

There IS no option for a 'non-interventionist' candidate in any race.

No, this is one of those very instances which I speak of, where you try to narrowly redefine Neoconservative to mean "Interventionist", as if that's what a Neconservative was, when in fact, there are interventionist Neoconservatives and there are non-interventionist Neoconservatives, it's entirely possible to be a Neoconservative who is prepared to confront the Soviets in the Cold War without actually going to Vietnam, and that is in fact Ronald Reagan, the Neoconservative-in-Chief himself.

[StCapps]

The duopoly doesn't give you the option because you don't want the option. The duopoly would put up plenty of non-interventionist candidates if they thought it won elections, but they know it doesn't, so they don't.

[Smitty-48]

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" (but we're not saying were going to fight a war over it, we're just saying you're an Evil Empire which is holding people in human bondage and we will confront you on this to the end of time, or until this wall comes down, by any means necessary, short of actually opening fire on you of course, because that would be fucking crazy) - the Neoconservative-in-Chief

Newflash; Ronald Reagan, was not actually, that Hawkish, at all, jaw-jaw, not war-war.

You certainly cannot; be a Leftist Commie sympathizer, but you certainly do not; have to chase the Commies up the A Shau valley neither.

[SuburbanFarmer]

The duopoly doesn't give you the option because you don't want the option. The duopoly would put up plenty of non-interventionist candidates if they thought it won elections, but they know it doesn't, so they don't.

You're wrong there. One of Trump's big draws was that he was seen as a non-interventionist/military adventurer/whatever-the-fuck-Smitty-is-talking about. Same with the Bern.

Turns out that neither of them actually "stand' for much of anything, but that was part of the initial appeal anyway.

[StCapps]

The duopoly doesn't give you the option because you don't want the option. The duopoly would put up plenty of non-interventionist candidates if they thought it won elections, but they know it doesn't, so they don't.

You're wrong there. One of Trump's big draws was that he was seen as a non-interventionist/military adventurer/whatever-the-fuck-Smitty-is-talking about. Same with the Bern.

Turns out that neither of them actually "stand' for much of anything, but that was part of the initial appeal anyway.

Bernie lost, and Trump said "bomb the shit out of ISIS". Trump was seen as toughest on terror, that's interventionist bro and the people ate it up. The no more policeman of the world thing isn't what sold Trump to the masses, don't be silly, that just sold well to us the rest of the public did not eat that up like we did. Calling out Iraq for being a dumb war doesn't make one a non-interventionist, just ask Obama.

[Smitty-48]

Yeah, the idea that Trump was elected to be a "non-interventionist" is patent nonsense, what Trump simply said is "Interventionist, but on our terms, to our benefit, and we better be getting paid for this shit, nobody rides for free, motherfuckers"