Trump doubles down on threat to take Syria's oil. President cuts off Fox News interviewer who appears to try to cover over his admission.
"Donald Trump has renewed his threats to forcibly steal oil from Syria, a move which experts say would amount to a war crime.
The president defended his decision to leave a small number of American troops in the war-torn nation after a general withdrawal in October by claiming they were only there to secure Syria’s oilfields.
“They say he left troops in Syria... do you know what I did? I took the oil,” he said during a Fox News interview.
“The only troops I have are taking the oil, they are protecting the oil.”
When the interviewer, Laura Ingraham, attempted to correct Mr Trump by insisting the soldiers were not there to take the oil but to guard the facilities, the president cut her off. "
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl … 79381.html
Do you support Trump's stated objective to use our troops to commit a war crime and steal Syria's oil?
Of course not, Sandy. Some will spin it to Trump's advantage though. They always do...
I believe most Trumpeters would support the U.S. illegally taking Syria's oil. A few will even admit it. In fact, I expect few on these forums will "stand on principle" and speak out against Trump's blatant admission of planned criminality.
Panther, that is in a nutshell why we are in the Middle East in the first place.
The Right does not want this information to be generally known as it smacks against the idea of 'liberty, truth and justice for all", as the standard reason for our military action.
Laura, a Rightwinger herself, tried to get Trump from so brazenly admitting such to a public audience, but as "thick" as Trump is, he could not pick up on the hint.
Rather than continue to be dumb in this matter, he might take the wise course and reverse such statements.
She tried to help him along, but he still couldn't just say that she was right and he misspoke. So, I tend to agree with you that he wants his base to believe he is at least considering illegally taking Syrian oil.
Hold on folks. There is a simple explanation for Pres. Trump's comment.
Please share. On the surface this is very disturbing. First I've heard of it.
Fox News is already running the story. Iran hacked them and inserted a deep-fake video file in place of the real interview video file.
I hope you are pulling our collective legs, GA!
Maybe I misunderstood Fox's explanation. Maybe what they said was the cameraman cut out early, right after Pres. Trump said "Maybe we will, maybe we won't," and he didn't record the part where Pres. Trump finished by saying, "Of course I am kidding, I left those troops there to protect the oil for the Syrian people."
Or, maybe they didn't say anything at all and I was waiting for someone else to come up with that "simple explanation."
I think you got one person, anyway. If Trump is reading, he'll run with it, though. ;-)
He got one person's attention. I couldn't verify one way or the other.
Strangely quiet, aren't they? One was momentarily lured out by GA's fake explanation. I guess they haven't yet been told how to defend this one.
Or, as I suspect, most of them do think it's perfectly acceptable for the U.S. to steal Syria's oil; they just haven't yet figured out how to justify it to those who still "stand on principle."
That wasn't nice PrettyPanther. I wasn't trying to "lure" anyone. I was just funnin' y'all.
We all take ourselves too damn seriously. I think I might adopt more Onionisms in my participation. Just too keep it real, you know.
Yes, we all need to lighten up once in awhile. I know it wasn't your intention to lure anyone, but so far, no Trump defenders have weighed in on this thread, except in response to your invented exoneration of Trump. So, you inadvertently lured one, it seems. ;-)
This is interesting, so what do the Trump supporters say about all this instead of just taking the opportunity to use GA's ruse as an explanation as to why Trump would say something so dumb? So he did doed it, yes?
It is so incredible and ridiculous, I thought that it had to be made up. But is it real?
Conservativ s always gripe about the media having a leftist bias. But how did a story of this magnitude barely gets a whisper and has stayed below the radar for so long?
I think that the rightwingers are playing good and decent progressives in just another way.
As for responsesand explanations from Trumpers, the silence is deafening...
Hey bud, since yours is the last of the 'where is their defense' comments, I will grab it to make mine.
Could it be that Trump supporters aren't rushing to defend his comment because there is no defense for it? I think that is a good possibility.
But, if that is the case, does that imply that they truly think the Trump comments they do defend are defensible?
And, if that could be true, could it also be true that Trump defenders aren't sycophants that defend everything-Trump, as portrayed by anti-Trumpers?
It seems to me that a case could be made that the lack of Trump-supporters defending this comment could lend a bit of credence to their defense in other areas of support.
Maybe they don't support everything, but just what is supportable.
Hmm . . . nah, can't be right. Nothing Pres. Trump does is defendable, right?
Maybe. Of course, not a single one is volunteering their position one way or another. They are merely silent.
Yes, there is that. But I think that may be understandable. When you have to fight for every inch, it's hard to begrudge one. Even if you should.
Aw, poor Trumpeters....I don't feel sorry for this predicament of their own making.
That's cold, Sandy....but I'm right there with ya! Kick 'em when they're down!
Better kick them good. You don't want them getting up again before 11/20.
Lol, that's kicking them? I guess I have no empathy, and very little respect for that matter, for anyone who still defends Trump after all he has said and done. They're grown ups making their own choices and they still believe he is fit for the office of President of the United States. Yuck.
So your Commander and Thief reveals to an international audience his intent to take something belonging to another nation in defiance of international law. Are you ok with that?
Are you a closet Trump guy?
"But, if that is the case, does that imply that they truly think the Trump comments they do defend are defensible?"
Yes, but at least they are debatable and are open to interpretation. But, A statement of a goal of "out and out" theft is not.
"It seems to me that a case could be made that the lack of Trump-supporters defending this comment could lend a bit of credence to their defense in other areas of support."
Oh really, not necessarily, why would that be true?
"They just support what is supportable?" What sort of response is that? Although the guy is an ax murderer, we support him because he is pro-life.
What sort of reasoning is that?
There is the defensible and then there is the ax murderer analogy.....
Come on Cred, "Commander in Thief"? Are you resorting to cuteness?
Did something I inferred or said give you the impression that I was okay with his comment? I didn't think I said or inferred I supported it.
Whether I am a closet "Trump guy" is something for you to decide. Of course, if anyone not on the anti-Trump bandwagon is to be deemed a Trump-guy, then I may be guilty as charged - but I hope not.
"Yes, but at least they are debatable and are open to interpretation. But, A statement of a goal of "out and out" theft is not."
Exactly. That was my point. Have you seen Trump-supporter defense of these comments? everything about this thread topic says no.
And finally, nope, your axe murder analogy is a false one. Yes, they do support what they think is supportable, why is that an unacceptable response? It makes sense to me. If we disagree I have no problem arguing with you, but if I have no doubt you are right then I would not argue with you. That makes too sense to me. But it is your declaration that there has been an axe murder. Not theirs, or mine, so why would I agree with you, or view my disagreement as support, if I did not agree that an axe murder has occurred?
GA, the ax murderer designation is for the purpose of this example a fact not a matter for interpretation,
if the man TOLD you that he was ax murderer, there is no room for spin or alternate facts. That is what Trump SAID in regards to his plans about taking Syrian petroleum reserves. No spin, no misinterpretation.
That's the difference....
I guess Trumpeters would be okay with the U.S.illegally taking Syria's oil.
I heard a rumor that Miles Davis' and Freddie Hubbards' estates are seeking seek and desist orders to force Liberals to stop using Trumpeters as a negative descriptor.
They say it is unfair that they suffer the pejorative effects of a characterization that is beyond their times.
They are suggesting the term "Trumpeteers" would be a suitable replacement.
Their inability to even say, "yeah, he's wrong to say that" supports the appearance of their unconditional love and devotion. To me, this kind of statement shows just how unfit he is. But, we don't even see an admission that this is wrong!
That s why I believe some Trump supporters actually approve of his plan to steal Syria's oil. They probably think we are entitled to it. I could be wrong, but since not a single one is willing to stand on principle and speak out against their beloved, it says something, doesn't it?I
Sure does say something. And, yes. maybe stealing oil is just part of the MAGA experience. But, what kind of principles are those? Not ones that I would think people want associated with their nation. It gets very hard to determine exactly what the principles are at play here, other than not going against Trump on anything.
Well, well, I think Trump, as he often does, was testing the waters to see how much of an outcry he would get for wanting to steal Syria's oil. Looks like he got his answer.
I wonder what plans are in the works to invent an excuse to eventually do it?
by Mike Russo 21 months ago
How can Trump be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize when his is constantly working at dividing his own country? Ever since he was elected president, he has constantly called the Main Stream Media the "Fake News." No modern American president has publicly spoken this way about the press....
by Ken Burgess 2 years ago
The revelation to some, that Congress & D.C. has been in general hijacked by Corporate, Foreign, and Special Interests run amuck... is too much to swallow for many.CNN & MSNBC has long been the propaganda media for these Corporate, Globalist, etc. establishment forces, and so they, along...
by A B Williams 2 years ago
Tuned into the News this morning, first Story;a man, Oscar Lopez Rivera, involved in over 100 bombings across America, was being Honored in a Parade...on American soil.2nd Story; A Play, Shakespeare in the Park, same City as the Parade, New York,but in this Play, Julius Caesar...
by Kenna McHugh 11 months ago
I had to post this here because it is so cool. CNN reputation is poor for accurate reporting, so finally, the public is catching on. https://www.forbes.com/"...the network saw its prime time lineup drop 26% in April compared to the same month one year ago. CNN's total audience in prime time...
by N B Yomi 3 years ago
I won't be voting in the 2016 election, as all the candidates who did seem to have good sense lost, and the two vying for office... Don't seem to be very bright... But aside from that, it feels like a set up, as a means to manipulate history. Neither is doing anything to breed confidence, and feels...
by crankalicious 2 years ago
Here's a recent graphic presented on Fox News:This graphic was presented for the specific purpose of showing how Donald Trump has performed better than Barack Obama during the first 100 days of his presidency.I have to wonder how many of Fox viewers concluded that this data point, which is...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|