Rubio: I Predicted Putin’s Actions in Syria
Increasingly the foreign policy candidate.
Two weeks ago at the second Republican presidential primary debate, Senator Marco Rubio predicted what happened in Syria yesterday with alarming accuracy.
Here’s a refresher from David Rutz of the Washington Free Beacon:
Everything Marco Rubio Said About Russia and Syria at the GOP Debate Is Coming True
Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) was prophetic at CNN’s GOP presidential debate Sept. 16, predicting that Russia would continue to exploit a vacuum in the Middle East and “prop up” Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad to demonstrate to the Middle East it was the most important power broker there.
The Obama administration was admittedly caught by surprise this week when Russia announced an intelligence-sharing agreement with Iran, Syria and Iraq to battle the Islamic State, another example of Vladimir Putin expanding his influence in the region after he deployed warplanes and tanks to help Assad earlier this month. Over the weekend, Russia announced it would step up its military support to prevent the collapse of Assad, which Putin believes would be destabilizing.
This, Rubio said at the time, is Putin’s vision for repositioning Russia “as a geopolitical force.”
Here’s the moment in the debate where Rubio made those remarks:
Again, that was two weeks ago. What’s happening in Syria right now?
CNN published this report last night:
Russia launches first airstrikes in Syria
Claiming to target ISIS, Russia conducted its first airstrikes in Syria, while U.S. officials expressed serious doubts Wednesday about what the true intentions behind the move may be.
According to the Russian Defense Ministry, warplanes targeted eight ISIS positions, including arms, transportation, communications and control positions.
But U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter countered that claim.
“I want to be careful about confirming information, but it does appear that they (Russian airstrikes) were in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces,” he told reporters. ISIL is an acronym for ISIS.
Rubio appeared on The Kelly File last night and elaborated on his predictions:
Megyn Kelly was clearly impressed:
.@marcorubio predicted Russian airstrikes in Syria at last #GOPDebate: pic.twitter.com/DvEpMCgFpg
— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) October 1, 2015
Rubio has distinguished himself in the debates on foreign policy issues and is on a trajectory to be one of the last people standing in the Republican primary.
Featured image via YouTube.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
What’s wrong with Putin?
Serious question.
He’s got a military base in Syria and he would prefer that the country not become a war zone which is also what the USA prefers. He doesn’t want the Islamic Caliphate in charge of Syria, which I still think is also what the USA wants.
The American public will not support involvement another middle eastern war right now.
Working with Putin is the best chance at stability in the region.
He is bombing pro-American groups. The statement from the Russian government that they bombed ISIS is a rather transparent lie. Even the (can’t-we-all-just-get-along) European journalists are acknowledging this.
You might want to check out some of those supposedly “pro-American groups.” Since when are al-Qaeda-affiliated groups pro-American?
Perhaps it would be more correct to call them groups that the Obama administration (aka the U.S. government) has been supporting.
Their is no ‘moderate’ forces. You got ISIS a bunch of varying degrees of incompetence and malignancy and Assad.
That’s it.
We have to face it there is a media campaign that was half fake bloggers pretending to be Syrian and in some cases female and we have anti-government forces that are mostly ineffectual, anti-Western, and or associated with terrorist organizations.
Anyone who thinks Putin or Assad are worse than the alternatives has not looked at the alternatives and is ignoring the last two decades in the Middle East.
We’ll be lucky if Assad and Putin beat ISIS and seriously it doesn’t matter if Putin is shooting at anti-government group A or B their both throwing lead at his side. Didn’t allied fleets get sunk in WWII when they might be used by the Axis? Same thing here. Anti-government forces provide cover and support for more hardline and there’s a race to the bottom there.
That is basically Trump’s position and once again just like his position on bombing or taking the oil fields in Iraq that are controlled by ISIS is spot on. Fiorina on the other hand wants to shoot down some russian planes with her no fly zone idea in Syria and start world war III with the russians.
Of course, you’re lying again. I thought Catholics thought that a sin?
“The American public will not support involvement another middle eastern war right now.”
Not under Obama and the Democrats, for obvious reasons. People who waste the lives of our servicemen and women cannot be trusted with more of them.
Rubio’s prediction was just as much deep thinking as the guy who predicted today that Obama will react as a timid coward to these events. In other words hardly deep thinking against the grain on Rubios point.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the administration’s strategy won’t work—at least not for people who favor security, freedom, or the rule of law. What does take an impressive (if warped) intellect is understanding the progressive’s logical reasoning behind their strategy. Our strategy is based on a false (but politically correct) understanding of Syria and terrorism, which pretty much dooms it to failure.
But he does have a policy distinguishable from Obama’s, unlike T-rump.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/09/29/trump-on-putin-controlling-syria-okay-fine-him-fighting-isis-wonderful-thing-very-little-downside/
Ragzini, either you don’t understand Mr. Trump’s policy or you pretend not to. Either way this post like most of your posts is a waste of everyone’s bandwidth. Letting Assad and Russia fight ISIS and then mop up the remnants left behind is not Obama’s plan. Working with Putin and leaving Assad in power because the devil we know is usually better than the devil we don’t know, especially in the middle east, is not Obama’s plan either. Obama’s plan is to talk and talk and then look in the mirror and then talk some more.
I’ll wait for your links, where T-rump says what YOU say.
The Obama administration’s entire foreign policy has been directed to this end since taking office, no one should be surprised.
Barry’s hot mike ‘flexibility’ comment told the world everything it needed to know.
Only Americans weren’t listening.
Well, if “Megyn Kelley was clearly impressed,” then take note and send your donations.
Yep, Megyn Kelly’s deep insight and critical thinking in getting to the applause line for Rubio’s deep thinking on this is exactly what marks the difference between her and the other bimbo reporters at the other networks.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/30/media/megyn-kelly-bill-oreilly/
SUCH a shame about her career…!!!
That lady would gut you like a trout. I guess that makes you a sub-bimbo!
Megyn has her orders. Since Jeb isn’t doing well they must promote Rubio, the other RINO. I give her credit for having Cruz on though. They seem to like and respect each other.
Not only prescient, but great work ethic!
“Of the lawmakers currently serving in the U.S. Senate, Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is the least likely to show up for work.”
http://www.vocativ.com/usa/us-politics/congress-absenteeism/
Oh for Pete’s sake. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the Middle East could have predicted that Putin would take action, like he did in Ukraine. Rubio’s “me, too!” nonsense really shows him not only to be a clown, but the class clown.
I don’t think that Rubio can be trusted. He just says what he thinks will get him higher Poll figures.
Yes. But some would argue that he fights for his principles. I can see their point, as he really, really fought for amnesty, and especially to keep the amnesty part a secret. Credit where credit is due.
Rubio is now, officially, a RINO. Romney outed him as one of the candidates who he thinks could win. Hopefully, that will be the kiss of death.
We could (and have (and no doubt will again)) do far worse than a President who leads by following polls.
Lots of conservative ideas get strong majority support among the public even as RINOs sink efforts to fight for them.
This does not illustrate the profound wisdom of Marco Rubio, and Marco Rubio did not predict precisely this.
The real wonder is that anybody is surprised.
Syria was first brought up by Jake Tapper:
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1509/16/se.02.html
“Russia is sending troops and tanks into Syria right now to prop up a U.S. enemy, [an enemy of human rights and of Israel, anyway, and someone Barack Obama said had to leave power, and it can be fairly said, that he despises] Bashar al-Assad”
Marco Rubio brought up airstrikes (Jake Tapper had said troops and tanks which is not really happening yet)
Here’s what you’re going to see in the next few weeks: the Russians will begin to fly — fly combat missions in that region, not just targeting ISIS, but in order to prop up Assad.
Actually, they aren’t targeting ISIS at all. And they probably won’t for some time.
Maybe Marco Rubio was hedging his bets.
Later, Marco Rubio further, said:
What is happening in that region is the direct consequence of the inability to lead and of disengagement. And the more we disengage, the more airplanes from Moscow you’re going to see flying out of Damascus and out of Syria…
Flying out of Damascus???
No, Russia is using an air base in the northwest of Syria.
And this is not related to disengagement from the region, but rather to responding to an initiative from Vladimir Putin to prevent an accidental or unintentional conflict between U.S. planes and Russian planes.
We guarantee not to shoot down, or help anyone else shoot down, Russian planes. So this is what we get.
And because bombing ISIS is our responsibiliity, Putin has a perfect excuse not to bomb there, because this avoids our planes running into each other. We just agreed.
We see now Obama should not have made an exception and agreed to discuss anything with Vladimir Putin.
Putin pumps him for information, to see what he says and does not say, what ideas are in his head and what ideas are not in his head, and Obama knows it, and decided a year ago or so he wasn’t going to take his phone calls.
Obama never should have responded to Putin’s call to discuss how we could avoid military conflict, and broken his resolve not to speak personally to Vladimir Putin.
Putin is not only not going to risk World War III, he isn’t going to risk losinbg any planes.
Everything Putin wants fits into his game plan. This was Putin’s idea, not the U.S.’s idea.
The Russian troops asnd tanks are in Syria, bit haven;t been used (the tanks have been turned over to a Hezbollah unit)
Vladimir Putin is playing poker, not chess.
Imagine a President so feckless that he cannot even have an unscripted conversation with the leader of Russia. We’ve caused this problem in Syria and the ME. We should have left Syria the fuck alone in a fight between a scorpion and a tarantula you don’t need to pick sides.
Don’t tell me Benghazi wasn’t about arming the al Queda allies or maybe AQ directly.
Ashe Carter said in his presser yesterday they’ve known this was Putin’s plan. Considering Rubio is on on the Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees, he should have known it.
Carter was lying …
“Megyn Kelley was clearly impressed” well that settles it … she’s like this generations Henry Kissinger … Rubio’s got the bimbo vote sewn up I guess …
Megyn Kelly = Murdoch’s Kitten
Rubio was just the latest GST on her show.
(GST = Gotta Stop Trump)
Is Rubio even old enough to vote? Geez just look at that face… Look at it . Of course we know he is old enough not to have any principles at all given how he was against amnesty before he was for amnesty. I don’t trust Rubio. Never will. And I will never vote for an open borders pro amnesty candidate, even if that means Hillary or Biden or Michelle Obama get elected.
Scott Pelley: Let’s assume your wall has gone up.
Donald Trump: Good.
Scott Pelley: Eleven, 12 million illegal immigrants–
Donald Trump: Or whatever the number is.
Scott Pelley: Still in the country, what do you do?
Donald Trump: If they’ve done well they’re going out and they’re coming back in legally. Because you said it—-
Scott Pelley: You’re rounding them all up?
Donald Trump: We’re rounding ’em up in a very humane way, in a very nice way. And they’re going to be happy because they want to be legalized. And, by the way, I know it doesn’t sound nice. But not everything is nice.
Scott Pelley: It doesn’t sound practical.
Donald Trump: It is practical. It’s going to work. They have to come here legally. And you know, when I talk about the wall, and I said it before, we’re going to have a tremendous, beautiful, wide-open door. Nice, big door. We want people to come into the country.
—————————————–
Which is, of course, an amnesty plan.
Which, of course, it is not.
And how did we get from Rubio and Syria to Trump and immigration?
When did you stop reading…and adopt denial as a coping mechanism?
“And I will never vote for an open borders pro amnesty candidate…”
No wonder La Raza and all the pro-Amnesty groups have endorsed Trump! Have you shared your uhm.. “unique” insight with Jorge Ramos yet? I’m sure he’ll immediately endorse Trump after you explain how Trump actually backs Amnesty.
Thanks for today’s entertainment. And the judges say…
***______”2 lmaos”______***
Maybe you can name all the pro-illegal outfits who’ve endorsed any GOP candidate, liar?
“And they’re going to be happy because they want to be legalized.
“They have to come here legally. And you know, when I talk about the wall, and I said it before, we’re going to have a tremendous, beautiful, wide-open door.”
He plans to offer a “touch-back” program, ya moron. He’s said so enough times that even enthralled Bernie Bois like you should have read it.
Maybe people have forgotten that Palin predicted Putin’s interventionist ambitions a long time ago.
So did Romney, in the foreign policy debate.
“Increasingly the foreign policy candidate.”
With the state of affairs of America’s foreign policy, or lack there of, and the monumental show of weakness by the current administration. Rubio’s “prediction” is nothing that a reasonably intelligent 15 year old who keeps up with current events could have figured out. So not very impressive.
Also, due to his joining McCain’s “Gang of Idiots” he has proven that he is not a viable candidate for President, and will never be.
“Increasingly the foreign policy candidate.”
AutoTranslator On … bleep beep fzzwhp … clicka clicka clicka fwing!
“Hey, let’s try to pass Rubio off as a foreign policy genius and hope people forget his constant lies and underhanded attempts to pass Amnesty for Illegal Aliens.”
Whoa Breitbart just slammed Rubio on immigration. Pretty thorough and very damning.
http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2015/10/01/exclusive-marco-rubio-fails-support-single-gop-immigration-enforcement-bill/
Like I said, Rubio is a pro-blanket amnesty RINO to the core and should not even be considered as a viable candidate, well other than by the Democrats.
Case well made. I’d like to leave a few copies around LI’s lounge so they would understand why many are not impressed that Megyn Whatsername thinks Rubio “is a genius, oh wow like just a foreign policy genius, quick let me tweet that, a genius did I mention that?”
Hey, I’m all for that.
Let’s leave this, too, for people to benefit from…
http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2015/10/01/trump-objectively-pro-%e2%99%a1bamacare/
From the Dallas Morning News on Trump’s touchback plan:
“I’m sure “touch back” proponents would say there are all kinds of differences between Trump’s call for deportations and the Hutchison plan [an earlier attempt to pass touchback in 2006-07 – Henry]. But the bottom line would be the same for undocumenteds: 1) Head home to sign up for legal re-entry, or 2) ignore the law and risk ending up behind bars if you’re caught. Those who qualified for re-entry under “touch back” would equate to “the good ones” that Trump says he’d let back in, no?
One interesting wrinkle in Trump’s immigration position is this: If you read his detailed plan, nowhere will you find the call for mass deportations. Why, I don’t know. Maybe that’s because it makes a great sound bite but hard to defend as a policy mainstay.”
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2015/08/is-trumps-send-em-back-immigration-plan-really-over-the-top-radical.html/
Gee, Marco, what a genius. Rubio’s great ‘prediction’ was nothing all of us here didn’t predict. Guess we’re all geniuses.
Let him go back to suckling the bosoms of Schumer and McCain.