Trump has sent a demonstration of strength against North Korea deploying a group of aircraft carriers towards the Korean Peninsula. With the loose-canon in charge of North Korea, a show of force is not guaranteed to have any effect on giving him a second thought. The measure instead may more likely simply exacerbate tensions in the region. Unquestionably, North Korea remains the biggest threat in Asia.
The extensive sanctions have had no impact upon North Korea when you are looking at an absolute dictatorship. Another missile test is possible to coincide with the 105th birthday of the late state founder Kim Il Sung next Saturday. North Korea remains working on a long-range missile to be able to strike the West Coast of the USA.
Trump recently threatened that the US would be ready for dealing with North Korea if China did not exert pressure on Pyongyang in the dispute over the North Korean Atoprogram. There was no common ground between Trump and Xi Jinping onm dealing with North Korea and thus we see the deployment of the fleet. Some think that Trump’s threats should be taken seriously given his response to a presumed poison gas attack a few days ago in Syria.
Meanwhile, North Korea threatened to be ready for a “ruthless blow” if the country was provoked by the USA.
The Commander-in-Chief personally calls both commanders of the two missile destroyers who carried out the mission in Syria to thank them for their exceptional performance on mission. How cool is that?
MEDITERRANEAN SEA (NNS) — April 9, 2017, the commanding officers of Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers USS Ross (DDG 71) and USS Porter (DDG 78) received phone calls from President Donald J. Trump.
The president called to thank the commanding officers, Cmdr. Russell Caldwell and Cmdr. Andria Slough, and their crews for their professionalism and quick response to the tasking to conduct a cruise missile strike against Shayrat airfield in western Syria, April 7, 2017. This strike was in response to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.
USS Ross, commanded by Cmdr. Russell Caldwell, forward-deployed to Rota, Spain, departed on its fifth forward-deployed patrol April 3, 2017, and is conducting routine patrols in the U.S. 6th Fleet area of operations in support of U.S. national security interests in Europe.
Caldwell took command of Ross Nov. 12, 2015, and is scheduled to be relieved by the current executive officer, Cmdr. Brian Gallo, in a ceremony onboard the ship April 11 in port Larnaca, Cyprus.
USS Porter, commanded by Cmdr. Andria Slough, forward-deployed to Rota, Spain, departed on its third forward-deployed patrol Nov. 30, 2016, and is conducting routine patrols in the U.S. 6th Fleet area of operations in support of U.S. national security interests in Europe.
Slough took command of Porter Jan. 28, 2016. In February. Porter went to the Black Sea and participated in the Romanian led exercise Sea Shield. In March, Porter participated in the multilateral Allied Maritime Command anti-submarine, anti-surface warfare Exercise Dynamic Manta 2017. Also in March, Porter was awarded the 2016 Atlantic Fleet “Bloodhound” award, signifying the best ship in the fleet at anti-submarine warfare.
U.S. 6th Fleet, headquartered in Naples, Italy, conducts the full spectrum of joint and naval operations, often in concert with allied, joint, and interagency partners, in order to advance U.S. national interests and security and stability in Europe and Africa. (link)
Before getting to the interviews by current U.N Ambassador to the United Nations Mrs. Rubio vis-à-vis Syria, it is important to reassert reference points that are being intentionally overlooked by media; reference points the MSM pundits intentionally hide.
Point One – Russia, Iran and Syria’s President Bashir Assad care primarily about one thing: keeping Bashir Assad in power. All other influential objectives are secondary to this primary intention. All of the actions taken by Russia, Iran and the Syrian Government are specifically focused on keeping Bashir Assad in power.
Point Two – All historic action taken by the Russian, Iranian and Syrian participants are to eliminate the opposition to Assad. Goal #1 keep Assad in power, necessitates goal #2 eliminate Assad’s opposition.
Point Three – So long as Russia, Iran and the Syrian Regime can use the terrorism of ISIS as a foil they will continue to do so. As long as the appearance of Assad fighting ISIS remains the cognitive reference point of the international community – it is easier to keep Assad in power.
Point Four – Therefore the continued ground action of ISIS becomes a tool, a foil, to keep pressure away from the international community focusing on Assad’s removal.
Point Five – It is currently more beneficial for the objectives of Russia and Iran for the ISIS terrorism narrative to remain in place. The Syrian regime can survive with Assad, and accomplish the agenda of Russia and Iran, so long as the appearance of fighting ISIS remains the international optic.
These points have evolved over time. What was true in 2014 (ISIS is a threat to Assad) is no longer necessarily true in 2017 (ISIS, thanks to Russia, now contained in a geographic region within Syria – and not the same threat as 2014).
This understanding helps to reset the current paradigm. This quagmire is brutally overlooked by the media.
This fundamental paradigm shift in regional action, is what lies behind Assad (and Russia) now focusing on eliminating the opposition to Assad, that is not necessarily ISIS.
The ISIS narrative (including al-Qaeda, al-Nusra) now provides the foil for Assad, with Russia’s help, to eliminate his opposition that is NOT extremist. Under the guise of fighting terrorism (ISIS) Assad is launching attacks against his political opposition with the intention to wipe them out.
If the Russian military and the entire Syrian military wanted to eliminate ISIS in Syria (said to be approximately 30k +/-), they could do so rather quickly. They’ve had over a year to assemble enough military personnel and military armament to defeat that enemy.
They have not done so because it doesn’t fit the current agenda: keeping Assad in power.
It is this specific quagmire, via Assad’s interests served by the continuance of ISIS, that creates a situation where the recent chemical weapons were deployed. Either:
• A.) By Assad against his political opposition groups. Not ISIS terrorists. Or…
• B.) By political opposition groups, against extremists (al-Qaeda, ISIS etc.). Or…
• C.) By extremist groups, against political opposition groups, in an effort to get the Western forces to attack Assad.
Both A and C are most likely. We can make a solid research argument for both motives. Given the nature of the victims, option B is impossible to reconcile. If I had to bet I’d say “C”, but the White House claims much evidence toward “A”.
What really matters is President Trump’s response as guided by the regional partners who are aware of this reality.
The joint mid-east alliance have a regional plan to combat extremism and bring back stability. The alliance knows President Trump has no intention of engaging U.S. forces in another mid-east war. The alliance members know for the first time in history they are dealing with a U.S. President that is beholding to no external political elements. The alliance is asking for Trump’s political leadership strength.
By President Trump assigning responsibility, and the promise of further action, to Bashir Assad; and by taking extremely aggressive and public action that was widely accepted as necessary by the larger international community – President Trump is breaking up the availability of Assad (Russia and Iran) to hide behind the useful foil of their opposition to ISIS.
If another chemical attack takes place, Bashir Assad runs the risk of being removed. And the entire world, sans Russia and Iran, will see the removal action as justified.
Remember, the primary goal of Russia and Iran is to keep Assad in power.
♦ If Bashir Assad did not carry out the prior chemical attack, he, and Russia, is now in a position of having to make sure that another attack doesn’t take place, ever. This means Russia and Assad need to re-engage the fight against whomever ‘might’ carry out another chemical attack. (Trump wins)
♦ If Bashir Assad did carry out the prior chemical attack, he and Russia, are now unable to use that action against Assad’s political opposition. (Trump wins)
President Trump is forcing Assad (and Russia) to fight ISIS.
And THAT is the exact response Assad gave after the 59 tomahawk missiles struck the Syrian airbase. See:“Assad promises to fight ISIS harder.” This is also one of the reasons why the targeted airbase is still operational.
It is important to reset the overall review to this include this perspective when you watch the interviews with Nikki Haley.
Overall, the situation in Syria is one where our approach today and our policy today is, first, to defeat ISIS. By defeating ISIS we remove one of the disruptive elements in Syria that exists today.
That begins to clarify for us opposition forces and regime forces. In working with the coalition — as you know, there is a large coalition of international players and allies who are involved in the future resolution in Syria.
So it’s to defeat ISIS; it’s to begin to stabilize areas of Syria, stabilize areas in the south of Syria, stabilize areas around Raqqa through ceasefire agreements between the Syrian regime forces and opposition forces. Stabilize those areas; begin to restore some normalcy to them. Restore them to local governance — and there are local leaders who are ready to return, some who have left as refugees — they’re ready to return to govern these areas.
Use local forces that will be part of the liberation effort to develop the local security forces — law enforcement, police force. And then use other forces to create outer perimeters of security so that areas like Raqqa, areas in the south can begin to provide a secure environment so refugees can begin to go home and begin the rebuilding process.
In the midst of that, through the Geneva Process, we will start a political process to resolve Syria’s future in terms of its governance structure, and that ultimately, in our view, will lead to a resolution of Bashar al-Assad’s departure.
We are seeing a lot of media reports about the U.S.S. Carl Vinson carrier group being re-routed back toward North Korea.
However, stunningly, what we are not seeing is any media pointing out the specific conversation between President Trump and President Xi Jinping about North Korea (as shared by Secretary T-Rex).
A U.S. Navy strike group will be moving toward the western Pacific Ocean near the Korean peninsula as a show of force, a U.S. official told Reuters on Saturday, as concerns grow about North Korea’s advancing weapons program.
Earlier this month North Korea tested a liquid-fueled Scud missile which only traveled a fraction of its range.
The strike group, called Carl Vinson, includes an aircraft carrier and will make its way from Singapore toward the Korean peninsula, according to the official, who was not authorized to speak to the media and requested anonymity. (link)
It is critical to consider the decision to reposition the Navy strike group against the backdrop of President Trump and President Xi’s meeting only 24 hours earlier.
[…] I think President Xi, from their part, shared the view that this has reached a very serious stage in terms of the advancement of North Korea’s nuclear capabilities.
They discussed the challenges that introduces for both countries, but there’s a real commitment that we work together to see if this cannot be resolved in a peaceful way.
But in order for that to happen, North Korea’s posture has to change before there’s any basis for dialogue or discussions.
President Trump indicated to President Xi that he welcomed any ideas that President Xi and China might have as to other actions we could take and that we would be happy to work with them, but we understand it creates unique problems for themand challenges and that we would, and are, prepared to chart our own course if this is something China is just unable to coordinate with us.
I don’t know how everyone else would be interpreting that specific line of commentary from T-Rex; but it sure seems to me that President Trump asked, in a very diplomatic way, for the nod from Xi Jinping to take unilateral action if needed. And, not wanting to compromise their relationship with N-Korea, yet understanding the stupid behavior of their adolescent-minded neighbor, China gave tacit permission therein.
What say you?
[It’s ok to punch him in the nose, he deserves it. Just don’t embarrass hi
Deport everyone that is a criminal (not counting being here) they all have to go. then we can deal with the rest. But no one that can here illegally can every be a voting citizen.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 