Connect with us

Latest

Video

Analysis

Breitbart declares ‘troop surge’ in war on Trump

Trump’s Afghanistan troop surge has been met with resounding disapproval from Steve Bannon’s news outlet

Published

on

1,742 Views

It didn’t take long for Breitbart to clarify what senior editor-at-large Joel Pollak meant meant when he declared ‘war’ shortly after Steve Bannon’s apparently acrimonious departure from the White House. The last few days worth of Breitbart material has been firmly critical of Donald Trump.

One notable piece was an interview with the popular American talk show host Dr. Michael Savage in which Savage said,

“Trump comes from a liberal background, and he saw which way wind was blowing and see what Eddie and Edith [Savage’s term for the common man and woman] wanted, and he ran with it. Now what? Now he’s hit a stone wall with his progressive friends, and so he’s got to do a 180? How far is he going to turn away from what got him elected? Is he going to become [Mitt] Romney? You know he’s going to move in another direction, but it’s anyone’s guess”.

This was published prior to Donald Trump’s announcement that he plans a ‘troop surge’ in Afghanistan.

After the speech in which Trump called for more troops to be deployed to the front of the longest war America has fought in its history, Breitbart published a scathing opinion piece by Brian Darling in which he declared himself a former Trump supporter.

Darling wrote,

“I thought it a big mistake for the United States to promote nation-building policies in North Africa, East Asia, and the Middle East when President George W. Bush pushed them and started the never-ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I worried that the destabilizing policies of President Barack Obama caused chaos, not stability, in Egypt and Libya.

I voted for Donald J. Trump because he promised change.

I may have made a mistake.

Should we retitle National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster as President H.R. McMaster? For all those progressives who rejoiced at the ousting of Stephen K. Bannon from the White House — How do you feel now knowing that Bannon was a strong opponent of a troop surge in Afghanistan? Not so good?

 The nation-building hawks have won and now expect the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol to cheer the president’s foreign policy conversion from a rhetoric of restraint view to one embraced by the interventionist wing of the Republican party including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and John McCain (R-AZ). So sad.

Despite the fact that President Trump announced that “we are not nation-building again,” he is in denial about the fact that he is maintaining the nation-building policies that he campaigned against as a candidate. President Trump’s policy is similar to that of Presidents Obama and Bush.

I was worried after the missile strike earlier this year against the Syrian government that this administration was slouching toward an interventionist agenda that ignored the folly of investing trillions of dollars in a country half a world away and putting Americans in harm’s way for a goal that is impossible to explain to average Americans.

There is no goal in the endless war in Afghanistan. The president is asking Americans to risk their lives, and their children’s lives, for what? What are we fighting for in Afghanistan? This is the same failed policy that Trump campaigned against”.

Whatever one’s views are or were on Trump, anyone who opposes American militarism would be hard pressed to disagree with Mr. Darling’s assessment.

The theme of longtime Bannon opponent and vanguard of the old American elite, H.R. McMaster being the power behind the throne, continued to play out on the pages of Breitpart. McMaster was a target of a further Breitbart  piece which was critical of the US National Security Advisor for failing to brief Donald Trump on the USS John McCain collision near Singapore.

For his own part, Donald Trump came close to admitting that Trump White House policy is no longer Donald Trump’s personal policy. During his statement on Afghanistan, Trump said,

“My original instinct was to pull out. And historically, I like following my instincts”.

In betraying his instincts over Afghanistan, Trump has betrayed a large part of his base. Steve Bannon represented a large group of Americans who were conservative in domestic affairs and generally anti-war. Now, back at Breitbart, Bannon’s views are being made clear through the publication of anti-war/anti-Trump opinion pieces and interviews.

The narrative that Breitbart and Bannon are pushing is that Trump capitulated to the military men of the so-called ‘deep state’ and judging from Trump’s actions and indeed his own words, it is difficult to reach any other conclusion.

While America’s liberals continue to argue for impeaching Trump, the fact is that, by sending more troops abroad in spite of campaign promises to the contrary and by failing to declare martial law in areas of the US menaced by radical violent groups like Antifa, Trump is more or less giving the globalist establishment everything it could reasonably want.

Perhaps Breitbart ought to erect anti-war monuments in the name of Steve Bannon and see who the first is to commit an act of vandalism against them?

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
tjoes
Guest
tjoes

Just like Trump to SCREW over the people that supported him. Now his supporters know what the people felt like that he screwed over in bankruptcy(s). The real Trump come through….no America first….no investment in infrastructure and US production….more war from this sack of shit liar.

Have any of you noticed that his endless solicitations for campain money, where you (a supporter) could give him your opinion, have stopped? He doesn’t care now that the swamp has swallowed him. I guess he said his Kol Nidre prayers.

Hamletquest
Guest
Hamletquest

Trump’s election was always going to be a power struggle between the factions of the Neo-Con interventionist v non-interventionists. Trump being an opportunist and to put it mildly – a political lightweight was never going to give the interventionist Neo-Liberal/ Neo-Con alliance a run for its money. He clearly does not understand the concepts of integrity through loyalty as does President Putin for example. However all these things aside what is most obvious is that the US WAR machine goes on and the views of the public go unacknowledged. Amongst those who didn’t even vote for Trump there were a… Read more »

Stu Pendisdick
Guest
Stu Pendisdick

Silly people simply do not understand, or refuse to acknowledge:

The Zionist Global Banking-Military-Industrial Complex *WILL* get what it wants.

Trump is a good man who is being held hostage.

The Zionists have their “plant” right there in Trump’s daughter’s bedroom.

You think for a single moment that he hasn’t been warned?

“Play along, or say bye-bye to your precious daughter”.

This is what they do. It is what they have always done and will always do until some way is found to exterminate them like the vermin that they are.

Andrew Smith
Guest
Andrew Smith

One of the main objectives of the “shadow government” in Afghanistan is to maintain opium/heroin production. A Taliban victory would shut it down, leading to huge losses to the CIA/MI6 distribution process for their globalist masters. From their perspective, the troop reinforcements are a rational business decision.

Marc Digiuseppe
Guest
Marc Digiuseppe

Well…in the history of Western Civilization, the last time Feudal lords and ladies governed the little people with contempt, humanity experienced the 100-Year War and the 30-Year War so I guess modern plutocrats haven’t really broken any records. That being said, they’re gonna’ keep killing our children until we stop producing them–then, of course Elon Musk’s worst nightmare comes true. You see, this is all a “Game of Thrones” to the Plutocrats. Right now, they’re real keen on things like regime change and continual war. In a little while, the spawn of their contemptuous machinations will run out of little… Read more »

ajokete
Guest
ajokete

A lame-duck President already? That’s fast.

Vera Gottlieb
Guest
Vera Gottlieb

Whatever happened to ‘drain the swamp’??? It isn’t being ‘drained’, it is being filled up even more with undesirables. More like a cesspool stinking to heaven.

Gerry Wright
Guest
Gerry Wright

Now Mr. Lindsay Graham thinks Trump is wonderful. Mr. Graham is hoping to get a ship named after him, he would be very happy.

Latest

European Court of Justice rules Britain free to revoke Brexit unilaterally

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that Britain can reverse Article 50.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


The UK is free to unilaterally revoke a notification to depart from the EU, the European Court has ruled. The judicial body said this could be done without changing the terms of London’s membership in the bloc.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) opined in a document issued on Monday that Britain can reverse Article 50, which stipulates the way a member state leaves the bloc. The potentially important ruling comes only one day before the House of Commons votes on Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit deal with the EU.

“When a Member State has notified the European Council of its intention to withdraw from the European Union, as the UK has done, that Member State is free to revoke unilaterally that notification,” the court’s decision reads.

By doing so, the respective state “reflects a sovereign decision to retain its status as a Member State of the European Union.”

That said, this possibility remains in place “as long as a withdrawal agreement concluded between the EU and that Member State has not entered into force.” Another condition is: “If no such agreement has been concluded, for as long as the two-year period from the date of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU.”

The case was opened when a cross-party group of British politicians asked the court whether an EU member such as the UK can decide on its own to revoke the withdrawal process. It included Labour MEPs Catherine Stihler and David Martin, Scottish MPs Joanna Cherry Alyn Smith, along with Green MSPs Andy Wightman and Ross Greer.

They argued that unilateral revocation is possible and believe it could provide an opening to an alternative to Brexit, namely holding another popular vote to allow the UK to remain in the EU.

“If the UK chooses to change their minds on Brexit, then revoking Article 50 is an option and the European side should make every effort to welcome the UK back with open arms,” Smith, the SNP member, was quoted by Reuters.

However, May’s environment minister, Michael Gove, a staunch Brexit supporter, denounced the ECJ ruling, insisting the cabinet will not reverse its decision to leave. “We will leave on March 29, [2019]” he said, referring to the date set out in the UK-EU Brexit deal.

In the wake of the landmark vote on the Brexit deal, a group of senior ministers threatened to step down en masse if May does not try to negotiate a better deal in Brussels, according to the Telegraph. The ministers demanded that an alternative deal does not leave the UK trapped within the EU customs union indefinitely.

On Sunday, Will Quince resigned as parliamentary private secretary in the Ministry of Defense, saying in a Telegraph editorial that “I do not want to be explaining to my constituents why Brexit is still not over and we are still obeying EU rules in the early 2020s or beyond.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Seven Days of Failures for the American Empire

The American-led world system is experiencing setbacks at every turn.

Published

on

Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


On November 25, two artillery boats of the Gyurza-M class, the Berdiansk and Nikopol, one tugboat, the Yany Kapu, as well as 24 crew members of the Ukrainian Navy, including two SBU counterintelligence officers, were detained by Russian border forces. In the incident, the Russian Federation employed Sobol-class patrol boats Izumrud and Don, as  well as two Ka-52, two Su-25 and one Su-30 aircraft.

Ukraine’s provocation follows the advice of several American think-tanks like the Atlantic Council, which have been calling for NATO involvement in the Sea of Azov for months. The area is strategically important for Moscow, which views its southern borders, above all the Sea of Azov, as a potential flash point for conflict due to the Kiev’s NATO-backed provocations.

To deter such adventurism, Moscow has deployed to the Kerch Strait and the surrounding coastal area S-400 batteries, modernized S-300s, anti-ship Bal missile systems, as well as numerous electronic-warfare systems, not to mention the Russian assets and personnel arrayed in the military districts abutting Ukraine. Such provocations, egged on by NATO and American policy makers, are meant to provide a pretext for further sanctions against Moscow and further sabotage Russia’s relations with European countries like Germany, France and Italy, as well as, quite naturally, to frustrate any personal interaction between Trump and Putin.

This last objective seems to have been achieved, with the planned meeting between Trump and Putin at the G20 in Buenos Aires being cancelled. As to the the other objectives, they seem to have failed miserably, with Berlin, Paris and Rome showing no intention of imposing additional sanctions against Russia, recognizing the Ukrainian provocation fow what it is. The intention to further isolate Moscow by the neocons, neoliberals and most of the Anglo-Saxon establishment seems to have failed, demonstrated in Buenos Aires with the meeting between the BRICS countries on the sidelines and the bilateral meetings between Putin and Merkel.

On November 30, following almost two-and-a-half months of silence, the Israeli air force bombed Syria with three waves of cruise missiles. The first and second waves were repulsed over southern Syria, and the third, composed of surface-to-surface missiles, were also downed. At the same time, a loud explosion was heard in al-Kiswah, resulting in the blackout of Israeli positions in the area.

The Israeli attack was fully repulsed, with possibly two IDF drones being downed as well. This effectiveness of Syria’s air defenses corresponds with Russia’s integration of Syria’s air defenses with its own systems, manifestly improving the Syrians’ kill ratios even without employing the new S-300 systems delivered to Damascus, let alone Russia’s own S-400s. The Pantsirs and S-200s are enough for the moment, confirming my hypothesis more than two months ago that the modernized S-300 in the hands of the Syrian army is a potentially lethal weapon even for the F-35, forbidding the Israelis from employing their F-35s.

With the failed Israeli attack testifying to effectiveness of Russian air-defense measures recently deployed to the country, even the United States is finding it difficult to operate in the country. As the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War confirms:

“Russia has finished an advanced anti-access/area denial (A2AD) network in Syria that combines its own air defense and electronic warfare systems with modernized equipment. Russia can use these capabilities to mount the long-term strategic challenge of the US and NATO in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Middle East, significantly widen the geographic reach of Russia’s air defense network. Russia stands to gain a long-term strategic advantage over NATO through its new capabilities in Syria. The US and NATO must now account for the risk of a dangerous escalation in the Middle East amidst any confrontation with Russia in Eastern Europe.”

The final blow in a decidedly negative week for Washington’s ambitions came in Buenos Aires during the G20, where Xi Jinping was clearly the most awaited guest, bringing in his wake investments and opportunities for cooperation and mutual benefit, as opposed to Washington’s sanctions and tariffs for its own benefit to the detriment of others. The key event of the summit was the dinner between Xi Jinping and Donald Trump that signalled Washington’s defeat in the trade war with Beijing. Donald Trump fired the first shot of the economic war, only to succumb just 12 months later with GM closing five plants and leaving 14,000 unemployed at home as Trump tweeted about his economic achievements.

Trump was forced to suspend any new tariffs for a period of ninety days, with his Chinese counterpart intent on demonstrating how an economic war between the two greatest commercial powers had always been a pointless propagandistic exercise. Trump’s backtracking highlights Washington’s vulnerability to de-dollarization, the Achilles’ heel of US hegemony.

The American-led world system is experiencing setbacks at every turn. The struggle between the Western elites seems to be reaching a boil, with Frau Merkel ever more isolated and seeing her 14-year political dominance as chancellor petering out. Macron seems to be vying for the honor of being the most unpopular French leader in history, provoking violent protests that have lasted now for weeks, involving every sector of the population. Macron will probably be able to survive this political storm, but his political future looks dire.

The neocons/neoliberals have played one of the last cards available to them using the Ukrainian provocation, with Kiev only useful as the West’s cannon fodder against Russia. In Syria, with the conflict coming to a close and Turkey only able to look on even as it maintains a strong foothold in Idlib, Saudi Arabia, Israel and the United States are similarly unable to affect the course of the conflict. The latest Israeli aggression proved to be a humiliation for Tel Aviv and may have signalled a clear, possibly definitive warning from Moscow, Tehran and Damascus to all the forces in the region. The message seems to be that there is no longer any possibility of changing the course of the conflict in Syria, and every provocation from here on will be decisively slapped down. Idlib is going to be liberated and America’s illegal presence in the north of Syria will have to be dealt with at the right time.

Ukraine’s provocation has only strengthened Russia’s military footprint in Crimea and reinforced Russia’s sovereign control over the region. Israel’s recent failure in Syria only highlights how the various interventions of the US, the UK, France and Turkey over the years have only obliged the imposition of an almost unparalleled A2AD space that severely limits the range of options available to Damascus’s opponents.

The G20 also served to confirm Washington’s economic diminution commensurate with its military one in the face of an encroaching multipolar environment. The constant attempts to delegitimize the Trump administration by America’s elites, also declared an enemy by the European establishment, creates a picture of confusion in the West that benefits capitals like New Delhi, Moscow, Beijing and Tehran who offer instead stability, cooperation and dialogue.

As stated in previous articles, the confusion reigning amongst the Western elites only accelerates the transition to a multipolar world, progressively eroding the military and economic power of the US.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Is Silicon Valley Morphing Into The Morality Police?

Who gets to define what words and phrases protected under the First Amendment constitute hate — a catchall word that is often ascribed to any offensive speech someone simply doesn’t like?

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Adrian Cohen via Creators.com:


Silicon Valley used to be technology companies. But it has become the “morality police,” controlling free speech on its platforms.

What could go wrong?

In a speech Monday, Apple CEO Tim Cook said:

“Hate tries to make its headquarters in the digital world. At Apple, we believe that technology needs to have a clear point of view on this challenge. There is no time to get tied up in knots. That’s why we only have one message for those who seek to push hate, division and violence: You have no place on our platforms.”

Here’s the goliath problem:

Who gets to define what words and phrases protected under the First Amendment constitute hate — a catchall word that is often ascribed to any offensive speech someone simply doesn’t like?

Will Christians who don’t support abortion rights or having their tax dollars go toward Planned Parenthood be considered purveyors of hate for denying women the right to choose? Will millions of Americans who support legal immigration, as opposed to illegal immigration, be labeled xenophobes or racists and be banned from the digital world?

Yes and yes. How do we know? It’s already happening, as scores of conservatives nationwide are being shadow banned and/or censored on social media, YouTube, Google and beyond.

Their crime?

Running afoul of leftist Silicon Valley executives who demand conformity of thought and simply won’t tolerate any viewpoint that strays from their rigid political orthodoxy.

For context, consider that in oppressive Islamist regimes throughout the Middle East, the “morality police” take it upon themselves to judge women’s appearance, and if a woman doesn’t conform with their mandatory and highly restrictive dress code — e.g., wearing an identity-cloaking burqa — she could be publicly shamed, arrested or even stoned in the town square.

In modern-day America, powerful technology companies are actively taking the role of the de facto morality police — not when it comes to dress but when it comes to speech — affecting millions. Yes, to date, those affected are not getting stoned, but they are being blocked in the digital town square, where billions around the globe do their business, cultivate their livelihoods, connect with others and get news.

That is a powerful cudgel to levy against individuals and groups of people. Wouldn’t you say?

Right now, unelected tech billionaires living in a bubble in Palo Alto — when they’re not flying private to cushy climate summits in Davos — are deciding who gets to enjoy the freedom of speech enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and who does not based on whether they agree with people’s political views and opinions or not.

You see how dangerous this can get — real fast — as partisan liberal elites running Twitter, Facebook, Google (including YouTube), Apple and the like are now dictating to Americans what they can and cannot say online.

In communist regimes, these types of folks are known as central planners.

The election of Donald Trump was supposed to safeguard our freedoms, especially regarding speech — a foundational pillar of a democracy. It’s disappointing that hasn’t happened, as the censorship of conservative thought online has gotten so extreme and out of control many are simply logging off for good.

A failure to address this mammoth issue could cost Trump in 2020. If his supporters are blocked online — where most voters get their news — he’ll be a one-term president.

It’s time for Congress to act before the morality police use political correctness as a Trojan horse to decide our next election.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending