Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

U.S.A strikes Syrian Airbase


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,626 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:33 AM

http://www.foxnews.c...g-airfield.html


There is a new Sheriff in town. Oh, BTW, Obama if you were watching: That's what you're suppose to do when a red line is crossed.

Of course there are those in Congress who are upset, namely Nancy Pelosi and Rand Paul, both of whom apparently think this country has 535 Commander in Chiefs. Both of whom would rather stand over the dead bodies of babies, and DEBATE whether or not we should prevent such attrocities. Who would rather conduct military actions by announcing to the enemy: "We're going to hit this particular target, at this exact time, on this exact date.".

President Trump has sent a strong message, not only to Assad in Syria, but to the rest of the world. The Obama era of leading from behind is OVER! North Korea has to be rethinking their constant missile launches, realizing that if they push President Trump that Tomahawk missiles could be raining down on them next. Oh, and those who say that President Trump is Putin's pawn...Russia doesn't seem to happy with the USA right now.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#2 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:49 AM

Hey, it worked perfectly! There hasn't been one single mention of the Trump/Russia corruption scandal since!
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#3 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,626 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 11:11 AM

View Postgsmonks, on 07 April 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Hey, it worked perfectly! There hasn't been one single mention of the Trump/Russia corruption scandal since!


Seriously? Do you honestly believe President Trump would order a military strike in hopes of squashing a fake news story, like the alledged Russia connection?
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#4 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 12:34 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 07 April 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Hey, it worked perfectly! There hasn't been one single mention of the Trump/Russia corruption scandal since!

Absolutely. Masking treasonous action through distraction. And this poor schlub was also craving a "win". He probably raised a semi- boner by getting to use his new toys and set off his fireworks. Somebody might have to ask Nunes how it felt to have his boss get excited.

But the thing is, for all his faux crocodile tears and rhetoric about beautiful babies, this POS doesn't give a flying frick about dead Syrian babies, never has and never will. He's just a sociopathic opportunist, looking to set off some booms to try and jack up that 34% approval rating back up to 37%. Did he care about dead Syrian babies back in 2013 when he blanketed the  Twitter-verse with calls for Obama to NOT attack Syria after Assad dropped chemical weapons on his citizenry, killing over 1500...more than 200 of them babies? No outrage for the babies then, just tweeting advice to Obama to stay out of a costly conflict.

And what about the babies blown to bits in Aleppo? Did he care about them? When asked during the debates as to what he'd do about Aleppo if elected his response was, "Have you seen Aleppo? It's pretty much gone" In other words, why bother with a lost cause? No baby love there. And his adamant stance against allowing these beautiful refugee babies into the US? No way! Mama don't let your babies grow up to be terrorists. And I guess he didn't see the footage the rest of us did all over the news of the poor little 5 year old Syrian boy, his brother just killed, shell shocked and covered in grime and blood and sitting in the back of the emergency vehicle? Where was candidate 45's indignation and resolve to deliver proportional payback back then? And don't forget, this whole reaction to launch missiles was a 180 degree turn from official US policy on Assad and Syria announced just two days ago. An appeal to conscience and a bow to what's right and proper? No, an opportunistic grab at distracting from the criminal investigation into treason being conducted against him and a flash, bang, boom photo op intended to shore up cratering popularity polls.

No, this calculating conscience-less Sociopath-in-Chief found himself presented with a triple pronged opportunity to make himself look "presidential" and tough, and simultaneously distract from the investigation into his collusion with Russia and shake his finger in Russia's face and calling out Putin to whitewash his previous coziness with him. Now I wonder if Putin will decide it's time to have Wikileaks drop a pee pee tape or other evidence compromising 45's financial ties and indebtedness?

Edited by yadda yadda, 07 April 2017 - 12:36 PM.


#5 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,626 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 12:47 PM

Wow, the amount of racism on this board against a white male President is just astounding.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#6 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 02:58 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

Wow, the amount of racism on this board against a white male President is just astounding.

Oh, yes, the white people of this world are suffering terribly from every kind of persecution. The poor, poor, marginalised white minority, quaking in their little booties at the merest thought of their precious bodily fluids being contaminated.

It's all those horrible, nasty Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Iraqi, Kurdish, and Arab women, children and babies. How dare they suffer horribly and die by the thousands, making your white president look bad. They're dead, anyway. What harm could it possibly do to use them to improve his political fortunes? It's not like he did nothing in the first place and allowed them to be slaughtered. Why, he even told Obama to do nothing and allow innocents to be slaughtered, which Obama did. Or didn't.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#7 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 03:07 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

Wow, the amount of racism on this board against a white male President is just astounding.

Wow. That's the best you got? Imagined racism? It can't be yadda that you are directing this at, because he and I have called out white racist remarks, and in this thread, *gsmonks didn't make a racist remark, so that means you are trying to be clever about actual racist remarks that were directed at Obama.

Had nothing better, right?

*(okay his second post might be a bit much, but it's not racist)
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#8 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 05:09 PM

Is anyone else uneasy for this? Not for the reason of potential escalation, but uneasy about how readily people are jumping to conclusions, both on what happened, and how this is a reasonable/justified action by the CIC?

I don't doubt that there were people exposed to chemical weapons. Maybe I am just doublely-shy of purported intelligence and military intervention after the failed U.S. intelligence (WMDs?) and wars in the Middle-East, though I would rather have a measured evaluation and measured response then to jump into things willy-nilly like the U.S. did in other countries.

It could have been Assad (or an ally) deploying a chemical weapon, or attacking a chemical weapon cache. Or if could have been Assad's varied opposition (or their allies) doing one of those. It has been shown both sides have in the past, as I understand it. Or some 3rd party trying to draw the U.S. further into the Middle-East.

Even if one could prove the first option, is the conclusion we should definitely step in? I know we have different norms regarding chemical warfare than convention warfare, so it is a considered a provocation worse than the conventional warfare that has killed many more in this same war, but it still seems like selective outrage. And this hasn't been the only chemical weapons released since Assad's has purported been taken from him. And there is no doubt that Assad is a dictator who has brought much harm to his people, though some of his opposition (such as ISIL) is horrible also. There are no good answers. I hope it was done on false pretences with some other goal in mind than whatever goal they are purporting right now.

I am going to try to not be unconsciously drawn to the sounds of the war-drums.

ETA: Also, Congress has to declare war usually, or at least authorize military action, but they refused to authorize military action in response to chemical weapons when Obama asked. There was no such authorization here. Was Trump's decision legal? And/or at least executive action over-reach?

Edited by sierraleone, 07 April 2017 - 08:28 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#9 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,772 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 05:19 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

View Postgsmonks, on 07 April 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Hey, it worked perfectly! There hasn't been one single mention of the Trump/Russia corruption scandal since!


Seriously? Do you honestly believe President Trump would order a military strike in hopes of squashing a fake news story, like the alledged Russia connection?

Assad knew about the strike and removed all personnel and equipment.  45 told the Russians about the strike.  It's not too big a leap to conclude that the Russians told Assad.  If that's too big a leap for you, I'll help you jump from one dot to the next.

Today oil prices are up and the stock for the weapon's manufacturer is up as well.  War is profitable business, and all three of these players are in the oil business.

Instead of getting all wrapped up in the distraction, pay attention dude.  Pay attention.

So, to answer you stupid question, why yes, I absolutely think he'd do it.  I don't think he'd even bat an eye.  This was all political theater for those of us at home and to let powerful men make $$ on the profits of war.  Course the bombs were real, and one day, this theater production is going to hit home.  We're going to have front row seats in the end, so bring sunblock.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#10 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,626 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 06:07 PM

View PostElara, on 07 April 2017 - 03:07 PM, said:


Wow. That's the best you got? Imagined racism? It can't be yadda that you are directing this at, because he and I have called out white racist remarks, and in this thread, *gsmonks didn't make a racist remark, so that means you are trying to be clever about actual racist remarks that were directed at Obama.

Had nothing better, right?

*(okay his second post might be a bit much, but it's not racist)


Well anytime anyone disagreed with Obama, the cry of Racism went up. Whether it was true or not. I'm merely returning the favor.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#11 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,626 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 06:12 PM

View Postsierraleone, on 07 April 2017 - 05:09 PM, said:


ETA: Also, Congress has to declare war usually, or at least authorize military action, but they refused to authorize military action in response to chemical weapons when Obama asked. There was no such authorization here. Was Trump's decision legal? And/or at least executive action over-reach?

Only Congress can declare war, that is true. And I do believe they have to authorize military action, although how THAT works I don't know. We only have one commander in chief, not 535 commanders in chief. If I'm not mistaken (and I very well could be) I think Congress's "Authorizing military force" amounts to their paying the bill, or funding the military action. Congress's power is the power of the purse. A President can't very well fight a war if he doesn't have money.

As for whether or not the airstrike was legal, I do believe it was. Now if further action is required, President Trump is going to have to get Congress to authorize the funding for it.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#12 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 06:23 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 06:12 PM, said:

As for whether or not the airstrike was legal, I do believe it was. Now if further action is required, President Trump is going to have to get Congress to authorize the funding for it.

Do you have support for this assertion?

After reading this CNN article the most I would argue is that your assertion is legally untried. AND this airstrike doesn't follow other norms where Congress authorization is not specifically required; that is, the Executive Branch's unilaterally ordered military action wasn't (1) in self-dense, (2) a non-combat role, (3) a situation in which Congress has otherwise more general/advance authorization (that could be argued perhaps against ISIS, or other terrorist/non-state actors, but not against Assad's recognized sovereign government).

Edited by sierraleone, 07 April 2017 - 06:26 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#13 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 06:59 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 06:07 PM, said:

View PostElara, on 07 April 2017 - 03:07 PM, said:

Wow. That's the best you got? Imagined racism? It can't be yadda that you are directing this at, because he and I have called out white racist remarks, and in this thread, *gsmonks didn't make a racist remark, so that means you are trying to be clever about actual racist remarks that were directed at Obama.

Had nothing better, right?

*(okay his second post might be a bit much, but it's not racist)


Well anytime anyone disagreed with Obama, the cry of Racism went up. Whether it was true or not. I'm merely returning the favor.

No, maybe sometimes, but not anytime. And here is the big difference, you posted that right after yadda, who has defended you when you were accused of being racist. Give me time and I'll find the post for you.
So, when you say: "anytime anyone disagreed with Obama, the cry of Racism went up". That would be an unfair and untrue statement, and possibly you attempting to deflect because you had nothing else to use in response to yadda's post.

Edit to add the post I mentioned:

View Postyadda yadda, on 22 January 2017 - 05:30 PM, said:

That's not what LoTS said at all. While I don't agree with much of what LoTS says, I'll take issue with what he actually does say, not what you falsely translate according to your own random jargon. There's enough "fake news", lies and distortion going around these days. Don't add to the problem.

Edited by Elara, 07 April 2017 - 07:25 PM.

El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#14 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 07:22 PM

What's amusing in a horrifying way is the way the Russians were accidentally caught with their pants down (by the missile attack) and straightaway blew up a hospital as they tried to "destroy the evidence", the "evidence" being human beings poisoned by whatever illegal nerve agents and/or poisons were used on them.

You have to ask yourself why the Russians would try to blow up the people Assad allegedly used gas and/or poison against. Is it Assad they're trying to protect, or themselves, or both?

Nerve gas and airborne toxins tend to be a Middle Eastern staple. Chemical Ali used various illegal concoctions against Iraqi citizens, as did the Christian Druze Militia in Lebanon.

What's suspect in all of this is the presence of VR, an isomer of VX, which was developed by the Soviets back in the 1950's. Later they developed Novichok in the 1970's. It has been widely reported that all of the nerve agents used by the Syrians are binary:

"so-named because they are mixed from several different components within a few days of use.  For example, binary Sarin is made by combining isopropyl alcohol with methylphosphonyl difluoride, usually with some kind of additive to deal with the residual acid produced.  The nerve agent Soman can also be produced through a binary process.  The nerve agent VX has a similar binary process, although it proved to be a more complicated process than merely mixing the materials."

https://www.bellingc...-attack-claims/

The reason the chemical storehouses go up with such a bang is the presence of solvents used as a mixer and dispersal agent. It's worth a look to see the table of common organic solvents, if only because many of them are familiar to pretty much everyone. Many common organic solvents are both carcinogens and natural neurotoxins:

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/87-104/

https://www.organicd...c_solvents.html

A cursory look at the list on the left should also enlighten you as to how easy it is to obtains the ingredients used to make some common WMD's.

Edited by gsmonks, 07 April 2017 - 07:27 PM.

Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#15 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 07:39 PM

Further, what the news networks don't tell you about those horrific scenes of people being gassed is the fate of the 1st responders, many of whom will develop cancers and crippling neurological disorders.

Wasn't it cute how all the hawks said they wanted to see the damage inflicted by their cruise missiles? They're like kids playing with dynamite. Not a shred of awareness that their little toys are being used against human beings.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#16 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 08:44 PM

Russia Suspends Cooperation With U.S. in Syria After Missile Strikes
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#17 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,988 posts

Posted 08 April 2017 - 10:05 AM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

View Postgsmonks, on 07 April 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Hey, it worked perfectly! There hasn't been one single mention of the Trump/Russia corruption scandal since!


Seriously? Do you honestly believe President Trump would order a military strike in hopes of squashing a fake news story, like the alledged Russia connection?

What, in his entire history, would make you think he would not do that? Seriously, name one thing.

#18 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,988 posts

Posted 08 April 2017 - 10:07 AM

Considering that the Republicans threatened to impeach Obama if he executed unauthorized strikes against Assad...

#19 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 08 April 2017 - 11:05 AM

View PostOmega, on 08 April 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

Considering that the Republicans threatened to impeach Obama if he executed unauthorized strikes against Assad...

Yes, I am reading this Atlantic article on the unconstitutionality/legality of this unilateral strike by the Executive Branch.

Per this quoted Trump tweet:

Quote

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
11:14 AM - 29 Aug 2013   

Even Trump asserted an understanding Obama needed congressional approval.

And this part of the article:

Quote

Back in 2013, “more than 100 House lawmakers––at least 98 Republicans and 18 Democrats––signed on to a letter formally requesting that President Obama seek congressional approval for any military response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria,” the Washington Post reported. “The letter, first written by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), suggests that failure to seek congressional authorization for military strikes would be unconstitutional.”


(which ideas/warnings been re-asserted by Congressmen this week, following this quote in the article).

If accurately reported, one can only come to one of two conclusions:
1) The law makers were right
2) The law makers were wrong

Of course, we may not know with certainty, as this has been rarely tested in the courts.

Basically, I figure it hasn't been tested when it could have been, because everyone in congress wants to wash their hands of any perceived responsibility, in-case the perceived repercussions of their approving/stopping military action could be held against them.

And there is no good military action, the fact that the situation is perceived to call for military action means you are in a situation in which there is no good response. Any action that results in destruction and/or death is at its outset bad, one has to search for the good, either by (1) bolster yourself: make not just your position, but your action as beyond reproach. Or just to project strength, that is enough for some people, (2) degrade the enemy: completely discredit their position/actions, and other-ize them to the point that the harm done to their side doesn't matter (and that may include civilians/bystanders), and/or (3) glory/accomplishment: with expectations that your actions will improve the situation, and not worsen or stagnant it.

And Presidents don't want their powers checked. Even if they plan to use their Commander-in-Chief role responsibly. they don't want an recalcitrant Congress to check them on a military action they feel/think, possibly backed up by intelligence/strategy, that is necessary or smart. It also allows Congress to not just side-step culpability for the large party, but if they want to, to impeach or otherwise hold the President responsible for side-stepping Congress when Congress would see it in their interest. In their interest could be for purely political reasons, and/or averting a perceived disastrous strategy embarked on by the President.

So, if lawmakers have flipped on what they said in 2013 (or are silent now/in upcoming days), they are playing politics. Especially as there are many more Russians on the ground in Syria now, the situation is *more* complicated and rift with strife than it was in 2013.

I am also worried that, between this and his speech to congress, this is largely the only positive press the President had gotten (and no, the fault is not on the media, take some god-damn responsibility Trump), what is he going to be inclined to veer for when future military options are perceived to be in the tool box during future events?

The article ends on this:

Quote

If there are no consequences for a president who unilaterally orders military action under all those conditions, what use is a Constitution that vests the legislature with the war power? Yet much of the political press acts as if the war power is not even contested.

Edited by sierraleone, 08 April 2017 - 11:42 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#20 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 08 April 2017 - 12:06 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 07 April 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

Seriously? Do you honestly believe President Trump would order a military strike in hopes of squashing a fake news story, like the alledged Russia connection?

View PostCait, on 07 April 2017 - 05:19 PM, said:

So, to answer you stupid question, why yes, I absolutely think he'd do it.  I don't think he'd even bat an eye.  This was all political theater for those of us at home and to let powerful men make $$ on the profits of war.  Course the bombs were real, and one day, this theater production is going to hit home.  We're going to have front row seats in the end, so bring sunblock.

View PostOmega, on 08 April 2017 - 10:05 AM, said:

What, in his entire history, would make you think he would not do that? Seriously, name one thing.

Consider this tweet:
  
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump


Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.

2:39 PM - 9 Oct 2012

Edited by sierraleone, 08 April 2017 - 12:10 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users