Posting up a readers response and a response to that readers response for GeorgeEaton.

**************************************************

My friend's response to the article:
I don't think Trump will allow it. It is why he fired Bolton

My response:
I thought the same thing, but new developments can change the calculus. I feel they have painted themselves into a corner where military/terrorists events make it necessary to make a response. Those in the war room see and know things we don't know about, and their decisions are based on things we aren't able to consider. I can't predict what direction it will go for a variety of reasons. But in the past what I have tried to do is look at the overall picture and determine what direction the puppet masters want things to go. It is usually the case, that the long term agenda is what will be done, regardless how we get there. That is why I feel that there will be a war against Iran, regardless of the reasons not to go to war.

Bolton was trying to preempt the problem and go to war sooner rather than later, regardless of the lack of reasons to go to war. At one point Trump refused to make a military strike because the strike was not proportionate to the downing of one of our drones. This was a pragmatic and cautious choice to make, but how did it line up with the long term agenda of the leaders behind closed doors? (yes, I do believe those men exist) Trump was his own man and wasn't going to be pushed into a war or make a knee jerk reaction. That is commendable, but it does not preclude the decision to go to war at another time with another justification. GE