Why did Russia want Trump to be president?

Mr Trump is not really interested in ISIS - he is just trying to overthrow the government and colonise Syria.
 
I'd say it is at the very least a questionable thing in case the aims are kept secret, not just from the world and Americans, but from even the American intelligence community.

Oh, BTW, Russia isn't overly interested in defeating Daesh, and neither is Syria, as they've left that task largely to the Kurds.

Really?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/document/594ca852c461882a108b459d/amp

There was also a recent report that Russia may have taken out ISIS leader, *Ph.D. in Islamic studies* Al-Baghdadi. Which is big news but that would mean the US media not bullshitting about Russian collusion for a day.
 
Assad is still the main concern of Putin. But we do cooperate with Russia on the N. Caucasus-Chechnya and Dagestan

And Assad is concerned with ISIS, so ISIS is taking it on two fronts in Syria.

Idk, why don't we just stay the hell out of their way? This is one area where Trump is starting to disappoint me.
 
Really?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/document/594ca852c461882a108b459d/amp

There was also a recent report that Russia may have taken out ISIS leader, *Ph.D. in Islamic studies* Al-Baghdadi. Which is big news but that would mean the US media not bullshitting about Russian collusion for a day.

With all due respect, Omar, you can shove your google / RT.com links where the sun doesn't shine.

And yes, sure, Al-Baghdadi is dead. That would be the fifth time, or the sixth? I forgot. Maybe the seventh is all the charm.
 

Frankly, I won't ever click on anything google. Moreover, I said...

"Russia isn't overly interested in defeating Daesh, and neither is Syria"

... and you think a report on a single instance of some missiles allegedly fired at Daesh amounts to a counter? Seriously? The Russians have claimed to fight Daesh from the get-go, but any analysis of their bombings indicated that their missiles and bombs usually landed ominously far from Daesh positions. Don't be a dupe, Omar, and stop loling at the nonsense you're spouting. It's unbecoming.
 
Really?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/document/594ca852c461882a108b459d/amp

There was also a recent report that Russia may have taken out ISIS leader, *Ph.D. in Islamic studies* Al-Baghdadi. Which is big news but that would mean the US media not bullshitting about Russian collusion for a day.

Over the past week, Islamic State militants made numerous attempts to escape the besieged city of Raqqa and head towards Palmyra using a “southern corridor,” according to the Russian military.

The terrorists are moving forces through rugged terrain to the Hama province during the night and setting up command posts and ammunition depots in large buildings there, it added.

The movements of IS militants in the area are being monitored by Russian surveillance assets operating round the clock, the military said, adding that any potential targets detected will be subject to precision strikes by the Air Force.
Russia is a helpful player.
The big players are on the ground. Hez / Qods / various rebels / Kurds / Iraqi army / Shi'a Brigades & the regime
 
as to Baghdadi, who knows where he is?
Last reports I saw was he fled Raqqa and is in some Syrian/Turkish border town
 
And Assad is concerned with ISIS, so ISIS is taking it on two fronts in Syria.

Idk, why don't we just stay the hell out of their way? This is one area where Trump is starting to disappoint me.
we lead the land coalition.It's a legit war, not some crazed regime change like Libya/Iraq.
Finish it out
 
I suppose that it's a pretty dicey choice, but if you are faced with much stronger opponents it is probably preferable to have them led by a narcissistic clown who never grew up. More dicey than I'd care to risk, admittedly, but the Russians like gambles.

This hit on a part of it that wasn't being addressed. The choice of Trump is not in a vacuum. The alternative was Hillary who could be counted on to check Putin on each front. It is that against which the Trump alternative was likely judged. The decision is easy when you hear Trump making radical statements about destabilizing NATO, weakening China through tariffs, isolationism, making an enemy on our southern border, dog whistling to white nationalists, a domestic ideology that mirrors the Russian party in power and that Putin heads. Not to mention preaching Islamophobia to undercut US power with moderates and quasi secular Islamic countries.
 
With all due respect, Omar, you can shove your google / RT.com links where the sun doesn't shine.

And yes, sure, Al-Baghdadi is dead. That would be the fifth time, or the sixth? I forgot. Maybe the seventh is all the charm.

if killing him once is a good thing, doing it six times has to be better, right?.......just like finding that one thing that's going to result in Trump's impeachment........we've had that five or six times too.......
 
This hit on a part of it that wasn't being addressed. The choice of Trump is not in a vacuum. The alternative was Hillary who could be counted on to check Putin on each front. It is that against which the Trump alternative was likely judged. The decision is easy when you hear Trump making radical statements about destabilizing NATO, weakening China through tariffs, isolationism, making an enemy on our southern border, dog whistling to white nationalists, a domestic ideology that mirrors the Russian party in power and that Putin heads. Not to mention preaching Islamophobia to undercut US power with moderates and quasi secular Islamic countries.

She could? :cof1:
 
Back
Top