Jump to content

Donald Trump 2018


TheFlyingBoat

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, mdmost said:

Mitch, use the Nuclear Option to get the votes to make the US pay for this wall that I said Mexico would pay for. 

And of course that pussy turtle will do just that. 

It might be prudent to ask the president to define what he means by nuclear option. 

He can be alarmingly literal in his dotage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mdhorn said:

Why would Dotard choose someone who shares the same views as the person he just ran off?  In the words of the late great Robin Williams in regards to unarmed police in an unarmed country, "Stop or I'll say stop again." Mitch, you're words are toothless without action.  

Turtles don't have teeth

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

And btw for all the pearl clutching about not consulting his advisors, it sounds like Mattis quit after trying to convince him, unsuccessfully. His Sec of Defense advised him, he disagreed and made the decision. That should be good enough for every poster here.

lulz.  Asked and answered!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Sending American troops to Middle Eastern countries without Congressional authorization nor a clear exit strategy, something that #bothsides can agree on. 

do you think that military presence in Syria is the issue that most people here are fundamentally taking issue with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Celery Man said:

do you think that military presence in Syria is the issue that most people here are fundamentally taking issue with?

You are fretting about the departure of a man who's last straw for resignation from the current administration was 1) pulling troops from Syria; 2) pulling troops from Afghanistan; 3) getting his feelings hurt that his recommendation for a military position was passed over.  Those are the fundamental issues that he was not aligned on and led to his departure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

So if there was some rebel militia operating in Mexico or something with deep ties to a terrorist group regularly killing American civilians, you think we would just sit back and take it?  We wouldn't go after them?  

The Turks see all Kurds as terrorists and a problem to be eliminated.  The idea of the Kurds carving out a piece of Syria/Iraq for their own nation-state terrifies them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fozzz said:

It's funny how whenever Syrian Kurds and Turkey are brought up no one ever mentions the fact that the YPG operating in Syria and the PKK, a terrorist organization that regularly murders civilians in Turkey, are clearly and obviously linked.  

They are a people that once had a land. Mapmakers failed to recognize this and abstracted them out of independence and made them trespassers. What they do is resistance and survival.

Their politics are complicated and should not be reduced to the simplism that terrorists are bad. Kurds do terroristic things. Kurds are bad. This is the trap of declaring a war on "terrorism." Terrorism is a subjective term that describes a violent means rather than the causes that employ it.

We bomb civilians. Should we declare war on ourselves because that is arguably terrorism? Isn't Shock and Awe just a euphemism for terror-inducing?

The Kurds ally themselves in different ways in different regions to exist. It's not simple. Don't reduce it to good guys and bad guys. They've been a splendid ally to us against ISIS. Any withdrawal we contemplate should consider their fate. I won't write that we must do so, because that word has no meaning in the cheap theater of American Foreign policy. It's all for the dimwitted audience at home.

A fighter who died fighting ISIS:

_91166594_c01fd1eb-70a6-4113-a286-994b95

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fozzz said:

So if there was some rebel militia operating in Mexico or something with deep ties to a terrorist group regularly killing American civilians, you think we would just sit back and take it?  We wouldn't go after them?  

Negged for likely willful obfuscation.

Do you think the Turks were just happily eating dinner and a bunch of unprovoked Kurds showed up and shot the place up? Do you actually think history starts at the point you describe?

In your example, should the United States destroy or conquer all of Mexico? Would any sane president and Congress endorse that policy?

Your's is an appeal to simple-mindedness which is excusable only when the appeal originates from the simple minded. I don't think that's the case here. Your intentionally muddying the waters.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are only involved in Syria because Qatar and Syria couldn't negotiate a pipeline that would pass through Syria and into Turkey.  Instead of negotiating, the middle east does what the middle east does.  Kill eachother and use their money to lobby our elected officials enough till we get involved. 

If you think Trump is incompetent, then I don't see how you could argue you'd want him fighting this war and risking the lives of our troops over something like this.   If Syria hadn't gone into full scale civil war, France probably wouldn't be in flames right now.  Enough damage has been caused and we don't have the capability to fix it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jack said:

When was the last time we didn't have a threat of a shutdown?  GWBush's first term?

What the fuck are you really saying? The measure was good until dumbfuck changed his mind on Wednesday night.

Edited by USMCHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

This is Trump afraid he's losing the Senate and a reminder that they need him just like Trump needs their cover.  

I think it is Corker trying to weigh between doing his buddies that are already gone a solid and voting no on an already doomed bill so they don't have to come back, versus explaining that to his electorate who will just see the 'no.'  He's already not running, so he should just vote no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, USMCHorn said:

What the fuck are you really saying? The measure was good until dumbfuck changed his mind on Wednesday night.

That the house and senate had all year to come up with a budget deal and waiting until the very last second to do it again.  Same shit they did with Bush and Obama.  If they did their job, the presidency wouldn't be as important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

x1000

Pathological is a great word for it. 

continued, alternate reality of your choice. plenty of criticism to go around then, and obv now. 

also, single actions and then reverbing them in defense over and over is just dumb and ruining our discourse. but we know that don't we?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...