Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Donald Trump is keeping the lid on internal American violence and preventing civil war

If Donald Trump is removed from office, which many of his opponents are now talking about openly, America will see chaos like never before in the lifetime of any American in 2017. One doesn’t need to be on the Trump train to be on the peace train.

Published

on

5,196 Views

In true Orwellian newspeak fashion wherein, “war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength”, the western mainstream media often accuses Donald Trump of precisely the opposite of that which he is doing. It comes from an arrogant attitude that those who have studied the last 60+ years of American rhetoric in geo-politics will be highly familiar with.

When terrorists become freedom fighters (the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan), patriots of a nation many in the US couldn’t find on the map become threats to America (Vietcong), when the occupiers become the victims (Israel), when torture becomes enhanced interrogation (George W. Bush’s war on Iraq) and when genocidal fascists become liberal Europeanists (the Ukrainian coup), it is easy to see how no nation has mastered what Orwell called “newspeak” in the novel 1984, just as thoroughly as has the United States.

But in recent years, what only those following geo-political affairs were subjugated to, became a mainstay of the domestic American political lexicon. Donald Trump is merely the most prominent victim of the all-American ultra-liberal newspeak.

Donald Trump has been accused of fomenting violence, inciting racial hatred, inciting hatred against women, of dumbing down political rhetoric, of being a traitor, of threatening the peace.

All of this is in actual fact true of many if not most of his political opponents and their mouthpieces in the increasingly vicious mainstream media. One doesn’t need to like Donald Trump’s policies to realise this objective truth.

If one has the objective of keeping the peace domestically, preventing revolution and holding off discontent, the best thing to do is give an agitated majority of would-be revolutionaries (or counter-revolutionaries as the case may be) a leader to call their own.

If one’s views that are felt to be oppressed, suppressed or ignored are given power in the form of a national leader who articulates and seems to genuinely hold such views, the people will be satisfied.

Donald Trump articulated this phenomenon of pure logic when at a post-election rally, he remarked about how much calmer the audience was vis-a-vis during the election. A boxer is always at his most outwardly violent at the weigh-in. He is always at his most subdued during a victory lap.

The fact is that as US salaries fail to catch up with rising prices, as domestic working class (sometimes called middle class) culture  becomes increasingly ignored or mocked by mainstream politicians, as foreign interests are valued more than domestic ones and as foreign wars become increasingly, long, costly and deadly, the silent majority that Richard Nixon spoke of in the late 1960s has become vocal, agitated and angry.

This has been the case for years. In many ways, ever since the watershed of 9/11 when a combination of an economy that left the worker behind (a trend going back at least to the 1980s) became combined with an America whose airports increasingly looked like and whose legislators increasingly sounded like the kinds of soldiers America once sent to places like Vietnam and Korea, the perfect storm was set and the discontent became palpable even if often un-articulated.

Police-state America, complete with a censorship agenda stupidly called ‘political correctness’ not only took away the livelihoods of its working citizens, but it censored their culture, their humour and their colloquialisms to the point that they felt they didn’t even have a right to complain about the problems in their lives, in spite of a Constitutional guarantee to the contrary.

Politicians like Pat Buchanan had voiced these concerns for years. However, Buchanan had the misfortune to reach his political prime during a 1990s when many Americans had not yet begin to feel the full sting of economic disenfranchisement and others could still more or less openly complain about their daily lives without being called racist or sexist. Words like ‘homophobic’ and ‘transphobic’ which are merely epithet’s designed to censor the social concerns of ordinary people were not even part of the vocabulary and America’s post Cold War victory lap (arrogant and incorrect though it was), was miles away from the post-911 crypto police state.

Had Buchanan been a slightly younger man in 2016 and decided to run in the election, he would have beat Hillary Clinton or anyone like her in landslide.

Trump represented a kind of Buchanan with a slightly less specific political theory, less academic rhetoric but a more overt sense of humour.

Trump’s message to America was ‘everything is going to be alright. I hear your concerns, I have many of them myself, I will address them if you make me your President and I’ll not shut you up in any case’. This is what “Make America Great Again” means to the millions of Americans who are invisible to the mainstream media unless they are on the receiving end of a joke from liberal so-called comedians.

Post-election, rather than re-invent the American left from a liberal experiment in social engineering to a kind of socialist bread and butter materialist leftist way of thinking that may have resonated with many of those who agreed with Trump’s diagnosis while disagreeing with his prescription, instead resorted to attacking the new President in the way they once attacked the silent majority and later the vocal majority of working class/middle class Americans. On top of this, Trump is accused of being a Russian stooge, when in reality Turmp’s attitude and temperament is vastly more American than his opposition whose policies range from handing the already broken US medical system to the insurance companies while using tax payer money to fund jihadists in Syria under the guise that such head-choppers are ‘moderate rebels’.

In doing so, the liberal left have gone from an establishment that could have resigned itself to an electoral loss and redesigned its politics, to a kind of shadow-government waiting to take power from the legitimate leader at any time. It’s no wonder the US neo-cons and liberals are so united behind the Venezuelan opposition who are behaving in the same manner, but in a different political and ideological context.

The fact of the matter is that the masses in Venezuela chose socialism although a small vanguard of capitalists refuse to accept this decision. Another fact is that the masses in America, the majority who are no longer silent, chose Trumpism, although a small vanguard of old Republican and Democratic elites refuses to accept this decision.

Should Nicolás Maduro be overthrow by the ultra-capitalist vanguard in Venezuela, the world will see just how big a protest in Venezuela can be. After all, when the legitimate government of Ukraine, imperfect as it was, was overthrown in 2014, the protests throughout the country (not just in Donbass) dwarfed those on the Maidan which was comprised of a combination of paid agitators, zealous neo-Nazis and a few genuine (however misguided) liberals, all of whom delighted in  hearing speeches from John McCain, more so than American audiences who twice rejected him in Presidential elections (the 2000 primary and the 2008 general election)

If Donald Trump is impeached, the violence in America that he is keeping in check will be unleashed with a vengeance. Trump is in many ways the quintessential unity leader. In an era with a more sane opposition, he would be viewed as a king of populist version of an Ike Eisenhower figure, a kind of household name since before entering politics whom one could openly dislike, but whom very few Americans could reasonably detest. Ironically just as Eisenhower was the military man who warned of the military-industrial complex, so too is Trump the businessman warning against the dangers of globalist finance and commerce.

Those who deride Donald Trump for being a throwback to the 1950s ought to really think twice. Is this a 1950s after Korea but before Vietnam when most Americans had unprecedentedly high living standards while the young weren’t being sent to die in a disastrous foreign war? For the generation raised on Bush’s Iraq, Obama’s Middle East and Ukrainian disasters and the idea that one cannot tell a joke about a man who wishes to remove his genitals, 1955 sounds like a rather pleasant place to be and certainly a safe place to be.

Donald Trump is the lid on the pressure cooker. So long as agitated Americans (whether one agrees or disagrees with what they are agitated about) have ‘their man’ in the White House, things will be calm. If he is impeached and replaced by the neo-con Mike Pence, America will see riots that will make the Vietnam/Civil Rights era look like a small and insignificant event.

Donald Trump promised to give ordinary Americans their country back, if Trump is removed from office, they will have clear evidence of an open conspiracy to take what they view as the genuine representative of that country away.

If the American left and neo-con right wants to vindicate every so-called right-wing conspiracy theorist, then remove Trump from office, if the American left and neo-con right wants to see what a Constitutionally “well armed militia” looks like, then remove Trump from office, if the American left and neo-con right wants to see what a genuine protest movement looks like, one that will easily spiral into a riot, then remove Trump from office.

Contrary to what some may feel, this piece is not an endorsement of Trump. It is a plea for those who have for too long said that ‘war is peace’ to avoid making the mistakes that will teach them what actual war looks like, in this case civil war. The liberals often mock Trump supporters for being ‘angry’….BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.

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

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
S.M. De Kuyper
Guest
S.M. De Kuyper

NO! He is describing the people in the middle you respect. involves you too.

S.M. De Kuyper
Guest
S.M. De Kuyper

Reply to Whispers of 2 months ago, today being September 2017. Americans cannot ever learn from their history as it is hidden before being written, which is why the Deep State was created under President Eisenhower, which he knew and why he gave his warning speech. The Deep State must be removed completely but would rather destroy the country than allow that destruction of itself to happen. There may come a time when for the globe to survive it, the globe must remove the US Deep State entirely. Probably the alien nations watching our globe carefully know this too as… Read more »

tjoes
Guest
tjoes

Hey….lets’ not be questioning President Dotard’s throne….it’s where he does his best work.

Latest

Nigel Farage lashes out at Angela Merkel, as Chancellor attends EU Parliament debate (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 17.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a quick look at Nigel Farage’s blistering speech, aimed squarely at Angela Merkel, calling out the German Chancellor’s disastrous migrant policy, wish to build an EU army, and Brussels’ Cold War rhetoric with Russia to the East and now the United States to the West.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

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

Latest

The Ukrainian President Signs a Pact With Constantinople – Against the Ukrainian Church

There is still a chance to prevent the schism from occurring.

Dmitry Babich

Published

on

Authored by Dmitry Babich via Strategic Culture:


Increasingly tragic and violent events are taking their toll on the plight of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Ukraine . After several fights over control of the church’s property, prohibitions and blacklists are starting to spread, affecting respected church figures coming from Russia to Ukraine. The latest news is that the head of the Moscow Theological Academy, Archbishop Amvrosyi Yermakov, was deported from Ukraine back to Russia. Amvrosyi’s name popped up on the black list of Russian citizens who are not deemed “eligible to visit” Ukraine. Obviously, this happened right before his plane landed in Zhulyany, Kiev’s international airport. After a brief arrest, Amvrosyi was put on a plane and sent back to Moscow. This is not the first such humiliation of the Orthodox Church and its priests that has taken place since the new pro-Western regime came to power in Kiev in 2014. Patriarch Kirill of the Russian Orthodox Church has been declared persona non grata throughout Ukraine since 2014. That decision was made by humiliatingly low-level officials. A department within the Ukrainian ministry of culture published a ruling stating that Kirill’s visit to Ukraine’s capital of Kiev “would not be desirable.”

Since the ancestors of modern Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians were first baptized in 988 in Kiev, the Patriarchs of the Russian Church have never had problems visiting Kiev, the birthplace of their church. Not even under the Bolsheviks did such prohibitions exist. So, for Patriarch Kirill of the Russian Orthodox Church to be denied permission to visit Kiev can only be compared to a possible prohibition against the pope visiting Rome. Since 2014, there have also been several criminal cases filed against the priests of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC MP) because they have called the hostilities in eastern Ukraine a “civil war” and have discouraged the faithful from supporting that war. This has been interpreted by the Ukrainian state authorities as a call for soldiers to desert the army.

Why Poroshenko’s meeting with Bartholomew is ominous

Despite the fact that the UOC MP has become used to all sorts of trouble since 2014, things have been looking even worse for the canonical church lately, as 2018 draws to a close. In early November 2018, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko broke the wall of separation between church and state in the most overt manner possible — he signed “an agreement on cooperation and joint action” between Ukraine and the so called Constantinople Patriarchate, the oldest institution of Orthodox Christianity, which is now based in Turkish Istanbul.

Rostislav Pavlenko, an aide to Poroshenko, wrote on his Facebook page that the agreement (not yet published) is premised on the creation of a new “autocephalous” Orthodox Church of Ukraine — a development that the official, existing Orthodox Churches in Russia and Ukraine view with foreboding as a “schism” that they have done all they can to prevent. Why? Because Poroshenko’s regime, which came to power via a violent coup in Kiev in 2014 on a wave of public anti-Russian sentiment, may try to force the canonical Orthodox Church of Ukraine to merge with other, non-canonical institutions and to surrender to them church buildings, including the famous monasteries in Kiev and Pochai, as well as other property.

President Poroshenko was visibly happy to sign the document — the contents of which have not yet been made public — on cooperation between the Ukrainian state and the Constantinople Patriarchate, in the office of Bartholomew, the head of the Constantinople Patriarchate. Poroshenko smiled and laughed, obviously rejoicing over the fact that the Constantinople Patriarchate is already embroiled in a scandalous rift with the Russian Orthodox Church and its Ukrainian sister church over several of Bartholomew’s recent moves. Bartholomew’s decision to “lift” the excommunication from two of Ukraine’s most prominent schismatic “priests,” in addition to Bartholomew’s declaration that the new church of Ukraine will be under Constantinople’s direct command — these moves were just not acceptable for the canonical Orthodox believers in Russia and Ukraine. Kirill, the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), as well as Onufriy, the Metropolitan of Kiev and all Ukraine, are protesting loudly, viewing this situation as a breach of two basic principles. First of all, the Ukrainian state has interfered in the church’s affairs, asking Constantinople to give the Ukrainian church “autocephaly,” which that church never requested. Second, Constantinople itself has interfered in the affairs of two autonomous national churches, the Russian and the Ukrainian. In the eyes of Ukrainian and Russian clergy, Bartholomew is behaving like the Roman pope and not as a true Orthodox leader who respects the autonomy and self-rule of the separate, national Orthodox Churches.

The Russian President sympathizes with the believers’ pain

Two days before Poroshenko made his trip to Istanbul, Russian president Vladimir Putin broke with his usual reserve when commenting on faith issues to bitterly complain about the pain which believers in Russia and Ukraine have experienced from the recent divisions within the triangle of Orthodoxy’s three historic capitals — Constantinople, Kiev, and Moscow.

“Politicking in such a sensitive area as religion has always had grave consequences, first and foremost for the people who engaged in this politicking,” Putin said, addressing the World Congress of Russian Compatriots, an international organization that unites millions of ethnic and cultural Russians from various countries, including Ukraine. Himself a practicing Orthodox believer, Putin lauded Islam and Judaism, while at the same time complaining about the plight of Orthodox believers in Ukraine, where people of Orthodox heritage make up more than 80% of the population and where the church has traditionally acted as a powerful “spiritual link” with Russia.

Despite his complaints about “politicking,” Putin was careful not to go into the details of why exactly the state of affairs in Ukraine is so painful for Orthodox believers. That situation was explained by Patriarch Kirill. After many months of tense silence and an unsuccessful visit to Barthlomew’s office in Istanbul on August 31, Kirill has been literally crying for help in the last few weeks, saying he was “ready to go anywhere and talk to anyone” in order to prevent the destruction of the canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine.

Politics with a “mystical dimension”

Kirill said the attack against the Orthodox Church in Ukraine “had not only a political, but also a mystical dimension.” Speaking in more earthly terms, there is a danger that the 1,000-year-old historical Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) — which now owns 11,392 church buildings, 12,328 parishes, and two world-famous monasteries in Ukraine — will be dissolved. The roots of the UOC MP go back to the pre-Soviet Russian Empire and even further back to the era of Kievan Rus, the proto-state of the Eastern Slavs in the tenth-twelfth centuries AD, when the people who would later become Russians, Ukrainians, and Byelorussians were adopting Orthodox Christianity from the Byzantine Empire. It is by far the biggest church in Ukraine, as Mikhail Denisenko’s non-canonical “alternative” church has only 3,700 parishes that include church buildings (fewer than a third of what is owned by the UOC-MP, despite the fact that Denisenko enjoys official support from the Ukrainian state).

What many Russian and Ukrainian believers fear is that the Istanbul-based Patriarch Bartholomew will eventually grant Kiev what is being called autocephaly. In that event, the UOC-MP may be forced to merge with two other, non-canonical churches in Ukraine that have no apostolic liaison. The apostolic succession of the UOC-MP consists in the historical fact that its first bishops were ordained by medieval bishops from Constantinople, who had in turn been ordained by Christ’s disciples from ancient Israel. Apostolic succession is crucial for the Orthodox Church, where only bishops can ordain new priests and where the church’s connection to the first Christians is reflected in many ways, including in the clergy’s attire.

Metropolitan Hilarion (his secular name is Grigory Alfeyev), the Russian church’s chief spokesman on questions of schism and unity, accused the patriarch of contributing to the schism by officially “lifting” the excommunication from Ukraine’s most prominent schismatic church leader — the defrocked former bishop Mikhail Denisenko. That clergyman stands to gain most from the “autocephaly” promised to Poroshenko by Patriarch Bartholomew. A hierarchical Orthodox Church is considered to have autocephalous status, as its highest bishop does not report to any higher-ranking bishop. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has stated that for Ukraine to be granted autocephaly from Istanbul, this would mean a complete “reformatting” of the country’s religious status quo and the severing of all links to Orthodox Russia and its “demons.”. Most likely, the new “united” church won’t be headed by the UOC MP’s Metropolitan, but by Mikhail Denisenko, who was excommunicated by both the UOC MP and the Russian church back in 1997 and with whom real Orthodox priests can only serve against their will and against the church’s internal rules.

Constantinople’s first dangerous moves

On October 11, 2018, the Constantinople Patriarchate made its first step towards granting autocephaly by repealing its own decision of 1686 that gave the Moscow Patriarch primacy over the Kiev-based Metropolitan. This 17th-century decision reflected the political reality of the merger between the states of Russia and Ukraine and established some order in the matters of church administration. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Moscow gave the Ukrainian church complete independence in financial and administrative matters, but the two churches retained their cherished “spiritual unity.” “Constantinople’s decision is aimed at destroying that unity,” the ROC’s Patriarch Kirill explained. “We can’t accept it. That is why our Holy Synod made the decision to end eucharistic communication with the Constantinople Patriarchate.”

How Moscow “excommunicated” Bartholomew

The end of eucharistic communication means that the priests of the two patriarchates (based in Moscow and Istanbul) won’t be able to hold church services together. It will be maintained as long as the threat of autocephaly continues. The Western mainstream media, however, interpreted this decision by the Russian church as a unilateral aggressive act. The NYT and the British tabloid press wrote that it simply reveals Putin’s “desperation” at not being able to keep Ukraine’s religious life under control.

However, Patriarch Bartholomew seems undeterred by the protests from the Russian faithful and the majority of Ukraine’s believers. Bartholomew said in a recent statement that Russia should just follow the example of Constantinople, which once granted autocephaly to the churches of the Balkan nations. Bartholomew’s ambassadors in Kiev do not shy away from communicating with the self-declared “Patriarch” Filaret (Mikhail Denisenko’s adopted religious name from back when he was the UOC MP’s Metropolitan prior to his excommunication in 1997). For true Orthodox believers, any communication with Denisenko has been forbidden since 1992, the year when he founded his own so-called Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate (UOC-KP). Unfortunately, Denisenko enjoys the full support of Ukrainian President Poroshenko, and recently the US State Department began encouraging Denisenko, by giving its full support to Ukraine’s autocephaly.

The lifting of Denisenko’s excommunication by Patriarch Bartholomew in Istanbul both upset and embittered the Orthodox believers in both Ukraine and Moscow, since Denisenko was excommunicated by a joint decision of the Russian church and the UOC MP in 1997, after a five-year wait for his return to the fold of the mother church. So, by undoing that decision, Constantinople has interfered in the canonical territory of both the Ukrainian and the Russian churches.

The UOC-MP protested, accusing not only Patriarch Bartholomew, but also the Ukrainian state of interfering in the church’s affairs. “We are being forced to get involved in politics. The politicians do not want Christ to run our church; they want to do it themselves,” said Metropolitan Onufriy (Onuphrius), the head of the UOC-MP, in an interview with PravMir, an Orthodox website. “Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate has been independent. Our church did not ask for autocephaly, because we already have independence. We have our own Synod (church council) and our own church court. Decisions are made by a congress of bishops and priests from all over Ukraine. We have financial and administrative independence, so autocephaly for us will be a limitation, not an expansion of our rights.”

Poroshenko’s premature jubilation

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Poroshenko did not conceal his jubilation about Constantinople’s moves. “This is a victory of good over evil, light over darkness,” Poroshenko said when the news about the lifting of Denisenko’s excomnmunication came from Istanbul in early October.

Poroshenko said he wanted a “united Orthodox Church” for his country, and he openly pressured Patriarch Bartholomew to provide autocephaly to Kiev during his visits to Istanbul in the spring of 2018 and in November of the same year. Meanwhile, Denisenko said that the provision of autocephaly would mean the immediate dispossession of the UOC MP. “This Russian church (UOC MP) will have to cede control of its church buildings and famous monasteries to the new Ukrainian church, which will be ours,” Denisenko was quoted by Ukrainian media as saying. “These monasteries have been owned by the state since Soviet times, and the state gave them to the Russian church for temporary use. Now the state will appoint our communities of believers as the new guardians of this heritage.” Denisenko also made a visit to the US, where he met Undersecretary of State Wess Mitchell, obtaining from him America’s active support for the creation of a “unified” Ukrainian church.

There is still a chance to prevent the schism from occurring. Poroshenko’s presidential aide, Rostislav Pavlenko, made it clear on Tuesday that the actual “tomos” (a letter from the Constantinople Patriarchate allowing the creation of an autocephalous church) will be delivered only IN RESPONSE to a request from a “unifying convention” that represents all of Ukraine’s Orthodox believers in at least some sort of formal manner. This new convention will have to declare the creation of a new church and elect this church’s official head. Only then will Constantinople be able to give that person the cherished “tomos.”

Since the UOC-MP has made it very clear that it won’t participate in any such convention, the chances of the smooth transition and easy victory over the “Muscovite believers” that Poroshenko wants so badly are quite slim. There are big scandals, big fights, and big disappointments ahead.

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

Latest

Trump DEMOLISHES Macron; Tweets ‘Make France Great Again’ (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 16.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a quick look at US President Trump’s tweetstorm aimed at French President Macron, who just days ago used the WW1 ceremony in Paris to ridicule and talk down to the US President in front of world leaders.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via Zerohedge

Macron’s office has refused to comment on Trump’s claims.

OFFICE OF FRENCH PRESIDENT MACRON SAYS IT REFUSES TO MAKE ANY COMMENT REGARDING TRUMP’S TWEETS CRITICISING FRANCE AND MACRON

* * *

Without directly referencing the rumors, Trump has branded reports that he refused to appear at a cemetery for American soldiers because he didn’t want to get his hair wet as “fake news.” In the tweet, Trump insisted that he wanted the Secret Service to drive him to the speech instead of taking a helicopter, but they refused because of security concerns. He added that he gave a speech at the cemetery the next day in the pouring rain – something that was “little reported”.

Trump’s rampage against Macron continues. The president slammed his French counterpart for his low approval rating, as well as France’s high unemployment. Furthermore, in response to Macron’s “nationalist” snub, Trump pointed out that “there is no more nationalist country” than France..

…before adding a spin on his classic slogan.

Trump’s rage against Macron continues, but this time, the topic is slightly more serious. What could be more serious than questioning the foundation of Post-WWII military alliances, you might ask? The answer is simple – trade!

Trump conceded that while France makes “very good wine” (an interesting claim from Trump, who doesn’t drink), the country “makes it hard for the US to sell its wine into France, and charges very big tariffs”. Meanwhile “The US makes it easy for French wines and charges small tariffs.”

“Not Fair, must change!”

We now await Trump’s order of an investigation into the national security implications of imported French wine.

* * *

President Trump isn’t ready to forgive the “French diss” served up over the weekend by President Emmanuel Macron.

During a ceremony honoring the 100th anniversary of World War I at the Arc de Triomphe on Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron insulted Trump to his face by launching into a screed about the dangers of toxic “nationalism” and subtly accusing the US of abandoning its “moral values”.

This did not sit well with the US president, who was already facing criticism over his decision to show up late to a ceremony honoring the war dead (the administration blamed it on security concerns though it’s widely suspected that Trump didn’t want to get his hair wet), and Trump has let his displeasure be known in a series of tweets ridiculing Macron’s suggestion that Europe build its own army, saying that France and other European members of NATO would be better served by paying their fair share for NATO while daring them to leave and pay for their own protection.

And in his most abrasive tweet yet mocking the increasingly unpopular Macron’s imperial ambitions (no, really), Trump pointed out that, historically speaking, Europe has been its own worst enemy, and that while Macron wants to defend the Continent from the US, China and Russia, “it was Germany in WWI & WWII,” adding that “they were starting to learn German in Paris before the US came along. Pay for NATO or not!”

Of course, Macron isn’t the only French official calling for the creation of a “European army”. The country’s finance minister advocated for the creation of a Continental army during an interview with Germany’s Handelsblatt – a comment that was derided by the paper’s editors, who pointed out that Germans “weren’t very supportive” of the idea. One wonders why…

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