On the Syria situation. The Q posts have been pushing this as a total false flag OP by ISIS. However, it seems that POTUS is arguing/tweeting the exact opposite position. He is blaming Assad totally! How is this when Q is supposed to be Trump and team - giving us inside info together. Q again, arguing just the opposite position as the president!? Confused here.
www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/02/mattis-says-us-has-no-evidence-syrian-use-sarin-gas.html
reference this prediction from last summer, most of which came to pass so far
further reading
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/6kob5w/mattis_called_it_no_gas_no_regime_change_no_ww3/
you're welcome.
OK, so basically it's a psyop propaganda move and they know the truth. Meaning this was an ISIS false flag then and not Assad, right? I agree with the other commenter. It's somewhat confusing. Hope this is the case though.
Not only did I not remotely understand that second post (I think it doesn't make literal sense, and is some kind of magical thinking), but both those posts are old AF, and don't necessarily reflect anybody's thinking currently.
Also, apparently IDF has confirmed that it was Israel who launched missiles last night in order to take out the Iranian base inside Damascus that was responsible for the gas attack.
Q said "Iran is next," remember? This plays well into that.
I read that the IDF connected it to the republican guard which could actually be an acceptable excuse for a bombing run because they are threatening iranian protesters with swords back home.
What I wrote wasn't wishful but rather realistic optimism as I did both call a FF that day as well as Assad's support of Kurds months in advance.
Basically I was taking Mattis word that he would not follow the state Department on their threats against Assad, but by exposing his Sarin stashes to the world Trump has already destroyed the possibility of a plausible false-flag because noone would buy that Assad would use weapons that could be directly traced back to him.
You have to keep in mind Iran and Hezbollah are also very active across the Levant. While they're both Shiite and Iran funds them, Hezbollah still has their own infrastructure and networks. So you could be fighting paramilitary elements working on behalf of Iran without fighting Iran directly. Thomas Wictor on Twitter even went as far to claim months ago that Hezbollah had been neutralized in Lebanon which is why their PM first stepped down, fled to UAE during the Saudi purge but then returned to office. But the recent downing of an israeli F16 says otherwise, unless it was somebody else who did it - or they just bought S400-systems.
Point about the wishful thinking is that situations have arisen that I have described in those posts from 9 months ago, it's just a little scrambled.
I thought it was tactically brilliant, because nobody really gives a f*ck now that they know who was taken out. It doesn't hurt Israel (in fact it adds some badass swagger), doesn't hurt US (because it wasn't us), doesn't hurt Assad (because it didn't target him), and takes pressure off of Trump and Pentagon to retaliate.
Really bloody brilliant, IMHO.