Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[josh]

Iraqi parliament tells USA to get the fuck out...


We shall do what is best for US, not what is best for them.

So much for rule of law, respecting other governments, etc.

And no, we have been doing anything but what is best for US, Kid.

Like threatening World Heritage sites is "good for US." It's a war crime, but you like torture, too, so nobody should be surprised if/when you endorse that threat, too.

We know Bambi will.

[josh]

So if Iran launches a drone attack to kill Mark Esper,  what would be wrong with that?


I don't know - are we fiendishly plotting to kill innocent Iranians?

Are we planning a drone.strike somewhere?

Keep up.  There are 54 targets.  But only if they pull the trigger first.

"first" is used with the definition of "anything we do is not first, it is always retaliatory, while anything they do is always first."

[josh]

So if Iran launches a drone attack to kill Mark Esper,  what would be wrong with that?


I don't know - are we fiendishly plotting to kill innocent Iranians?

Are we planning a drone.strike somewhere?

What if Iran claims he is?.Then it is ok?

There is a reason why extrajudicial executions are always an issue.

What were the “ problems” in taking out Bin Laden?

a) Squirrel!!

b) Going into a foreign country without their permission, suggesting that it would be okay if somebody else did that to us for what they considered equivalent reason.

c) Which time? Are you conveniently only counting missions that succeeded?! How surprising of you. Not.

[josh]

The claim by some Democrats that Mr. Trump had no authority to order this attack without congressional approval is constitutionally untenable and practically senseless. Authority to act quickly to eliminate a threat to the U.S. is inherent in the powers granted to the president by the Constitution. It defies common sense to argue that the president must notify Congress or begin a formal process of authorization before acting on an imminent threat.


Exactly.  It's like they never saw The West Wing.

It's like you have forgotten that The West Wing was a fictional television show.

[kiidcarter8]

So much for rule of law, respecting other governments, etc.


Earn it, get it

[kiidcarter8]

We are back to square one with Iran, ready to sit down and iron some things out.

Currently - yes - that respect is 100% granted.

[josh]

So much for rule of law, respecting other governments, etc.


Earn it, get it

Not how that works, Kid.

Their country, their right to dictate borders.

In this case, the referendum was non-binding, but if Iraq says to leave, we damned well better leave.

And the rule of law is not on the basis of "earn it, get it."

[josh]

We are back to square one with Iran, ready to sit down and iron some things out.

Says who?

[kiidcarter8]

Not how that works, Kid.


It really is.  The man killed was a higher up in said government and did not act admirably toward us now, did he?

Now he is gone - and we can start anew - if they wish.

(You don't hear Trump stating that there is more to come - just that there will be if they choose to once again act erratically)

Perfectly noble, sane and yes, ADMIRABLE stance on POTUS' part.  Many silently applaud - fearful of coming out loudly for concern it might further poke a bear.  That's fine.  The brave among us have taken a stand - and will continue in that world-bettering endeavor.

[REDSTATEWARD]

So if Iran launches a drone attack to kill Mark Esper,  what would be wrong with that?


I don't know - are we fiendishly plotting to kill innocent Iranians?

Are we planning a drone.strike somewhere?

What if Iran claims he is?.Then it is ok?

There is a reason why extrajudicial executions are always an issue.

What were the “ problems” in taking out Bin Laden?

a) Squirrel!!

b) Going into a foreign country without their permission, suggesting that it would be okay if somebody else did that to us for what they considered equivalent reason.

c) Which time? Are you conveniently only counting missions that succeeded?! How surprising of you. Not.

How convenient you dismiss the loss of American lives at the hands of a terrorist.

[kiidcarter8]

The claim by some Democrats that Mr. Trump had no authority to order this attack without congressional approval is constitutionally untenable and practically senseless. Authority to act quickly to eliminate a threat to the U.S. is inherent in the powers granted to the president by the Constitution. It defies common sense to argue that the president must notify Congress or begin a formal process of authorization before acting on an imminent threat.


Exactly.  It's like they never saw The West Wing.

It's like you have forgotten that The West Wing was a fidctional television show.

You don't like how Sorkin portrayed the Democratic president?  You don't think he got it right in terms of how a POTUS might act, given your precious "rules"?

[josh]

One of the problems with how this administration has conducted itself at the border is that when CBP tells us stuff, we have no idea if it is honest, mistaken, or a lie.

Which is it on this count? Did CBP detain Iranians and Iranian-Americans coming down from Canada? How could we know?!

https://twitter.com/CAIRNational/status/1213899545681317890?s=20

Breaking: CAIR-WA Assisting Iranian-Americans Detained at U.S. Border | CAIR Backs Legislation to Stop President #Trump's March to War on #Iran

vs.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/05/politics/customs-and-border-protection-iranian-americans/index.html

Customs and Border Protection denied reports of Iranian Americans being detained and refused entry to the United States over the weekend after a series of social media posts claimed that Iranian Americans had been held for extended periods of time at a port of entry in Blaine, Washington, at the Canadian border.

In one post that was shared more than 24,000 times, activists claimed that CBP had been "ordered" to detain "all Iranians entering the country deemed potentially suspicious."

"Social media posts that CBP is detaining Iranian-Americans and refusing their entry into the U.S. because of their country of origin are false. Reports that DHS/CBP has issued a related directive are also false," CBP press secretary Matt Leas said in a statement Sunday.

Early Sunday, reports surfaced of Iranian Americans waiting at a port of entry at the northern border, raising concerns among lawyers and advocates over whether they were being held because of their country of origin.

[josh]

So if Iran launches a drone attack to kill Mark Esper,  what would be wrong with that?


I don't know - are we fiendishly plotting to kill innocent Iranians?

Are we planning a drone.strike somewhere?

What if Iran claims he is?.Then it is ok?

There is a reason why extrajudicial executions are always an issue.

What were the “ problems” in taking out Bin Laden?

a) Squirrel!!

b) Going into a foreign country without their permission, suggesting that it would be okay if somebody else did that to us for what they considered equivalent reason.

c) Which time? Are you conveniently only counting missions that succeeded?! How surprising of you. Not.

How convenient you dismiss the loss of American lives at the hands of a terrorist.

How like you to introduce something I didn't say because you know your argument is full of shit.

You asked what was wrong with it, so I told you. It is not as if you have a counter to what I said.

President Obama ordered the strike on Obama. It was extra-judicial and involved an incursion into another country without their permission.

And if "the loss of ... lives" is grounds for taking out the leader of a group, regardless of the rule of law, then you are arguing that the number of Iraqis we killed are acceptable pretext for their taking out one or more of our officials who ordered those actions. GWB or BHO seem like they fit your profile. And now, with the "preventative" action bogusly taken by President Trump, he would seem to fall under your aegis, too.

[josh]

3 US citizens killed by terrorists in Kenya by Al Qaeda affiliate.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/05/politics/us-service-member-civilian-defense-contractors-killed-kenya/index.html

And we also have the US declaration that we are ceasing our efforts against ISIS for the time being, while we prepare for action with the Iranian forces.
https://www.airforcemag.com/us-suspends-anti-isis-operations-iraq-parliament-calls-for-american-forces-to-leave/

What could go wrong?!

Oh, wait - it's Obama's fault!
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/05/pompeo-blames-obama-iran-situation/2818151001/

Pompeo is out of his fucking mind.

[josh]

The claim by some Democrats that Mr. Trump had no authority to order this attack without congressional approval is constitutionally untenable and practically senseless. Authority to act quickly to eliminate a threat to the U.S. is inherent in the powers granted to the president by the Constitution. It defies common sense to argue that the president must notify Congress or begin a formal process of authorization before acting on an imminent threat.


Exactly.  It's like they never saw The West Wing.

It's like you have forgotten that The West Wing was a fidctional television show.

You don't like how Sorkin portrayed the Democratic president?  You don't think he got it right in terms of how a POTUS might act, given your precious "rules"?

Not my rules, jerk.

US Government rules.