TRUMP: Yes, He Even Branded A MAGAthread

[Bakery Hill]

And when the glorious US army murders, rapes and terrorises that's fine. It's just a couple of bad apples. Unlike the enemy who are all depraved, disgusting and deserve to be tortured to death. Of course, even if they don't, it's important we don't say shit about it, because We Stand By The Troops.

I suggest to read through this.

I'm talking about the opinions of ra ra military types, not the guidelines of the US Army. I notice you didn't even try and counter the point me or Merizoc made? Maybe you've got a vested interest in ignoring this information? I hope that's not the case.

[Uxupox]

It's literally a trash article. One point is the document saying that the CoC "bought sex with military money" but isn't implicating anybody.

It isn't implicating anybody in particular because the source is a SOUTHCOM document that has all the names redacted? It more than proves their point, that his command was involved in buying sex with military money.

Another is using "slur-filled emails" which links to another article with no sources to back up their claims at all.

It used a secondary source. Here's the CPI report.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/03 ... hts-abuses

Also the planting of weapons deals is not an Army issue but in fact more of a CIA type deal.

Oh dear. You're in the army right? That doesn't mean you can't have a viewpoint of your own you know?

1) No CoC = No relevant information
2) Not suprising and so what.
3) Viewpoint freely given and freely thought unlike those beneath the Kremlin slaving away for the glorious Motherland.

[Bakery Hill]

It isn't implicating anybody in particular because the source is a SOUTHCOM document that has all the names redacted? It more than proves their point, that his command was involved in buying sex with military money.


It used a secondary source. Here's the CPI report.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/03 ... hts-abuses


Oh dear. You're in the army right? That doesn't mean you can't have a viewpoint of your own you know?

1) No CoC = No relevant information
2) Not suprising and so what.
3) Viewpoint freely given and freely thought unlike those beneath the Kremlin slaving away for the glorious Motherland.

1. What?
2. So first it was unsourced, now that it's proven it's fine? Backpedal backpedal backpedal.
3. Again what?

[Uxupox]

I suggest to read through this.

I'm talking about the opinions of ra ra military types, not the guidelines of the US Army. I notice you didn't even try and counter the point me or Merizoc made? Maybe you've got a vested interest in ignoring this information? I hope that's not the case.

Somebody doesn't know that the LAW is also followed by the other branches. Besides it's not a guideline. You break it and they break you.

[Uxupox]

1) No CoC = No relevant information
2) Not suprising and so what.
3) Viewpoint freely given and freely thought unlike those beneath the Kremlin slaving away for the glorious Motherland.

1. What?
2. So first it was unsourced, now that it's proven it's fine? Backpedal backpedal backpedal.
3. Again what?

1) Exactly what I said.
2) Not backpedaling at all. It's a normality to see such actions in military espionage and intelligence warfare.
3) See number #1.

[Bakery Hill]

I'm talking about the opinions of ra ra military types, not the guidelines of the US Army. I notice you didn't even try and counter the point me or Merizoc made? Maybe you've got a vested interest in ignoring this information? I hope that's not the case.

Somebody doesn't know that the LAW is also followed by the other branches. Besides it's not a guideline. You break it and they break you.

And again I'm not talking about the guidelines or LAWS of the US Army or the navy or airforce or whatever, I'm talking about the attitudes of apologists,

[MERIZoC]

I'm talking about the opinions of ra ra military types, not the guidelines of the US Army. I notice you didn't even try and counter the point me or Merizoc made? Maybe you've got a vested interest in ignoring this information? I hope that's not the case.

Somebody doesn't know that the LAW is also followed by the other branches. Besides it's not a guideline. You break it and they break you.

It's not to hard to understand that people break the law and get away with it at times.

[Uxupox]

Somebody doesn't know that the LAW is also followed by the other branches. Besides it's not a guideline. You break it and they break you.

And again I'm not talking about the guidelines or LAWS of the US Army or the navy or airforce or whatever, I'm talking about the attitudes of apologists,

It's a principle of offensive. If such actions benefit the American public then yes it's good.

[Bakery Hill]

1. What?
2. So first it was unsourced, now that it's proven it's fine? Backpedal backpedal backpedal.
3. Again what?

1) Exactly what I said.
2) Not backpedaling at all. It's a normality to see such actions in military espionage and intelligence warfare.
3) See number #1.

You keep being intellectually dishonest and refuse to properly explain yourself. I'm coming into this thread with good faith to exchange ideas and debate points, please be courteous enough to do the same.

[Uxupox]

Somebody doesn't know that the LAW is also followed by the other branches. Besides it's not a guideline. You break it and they break you.

It's not to hard to understand that people break the law and get away with it at times.

And those that do break it should be penalized but I'm not part of JAG so I don't have authority of such measures.

[MERIZoC]

And again I'm not talking about the guidelines or LAWS of the US Army or the navy or airforce or whatever, I'm talking about the attitudes of apologists,

It's a principle of offensive. If such actions benefit the American public then yes it's good.

I fail to see how destabilizing Latin America has benefitted me.

[Uxupox]

1) Exactly what I said.
2) Not backpedaling at all. It's a normality to see such actions in military espionage and intelligence warfare.
3) See number #1.

You keep being intellectually dishonest and refuse to properly explain yourself. I'm coming into this thread with good faith to exchange ideas and debate points, please be courteous enough to do the same.

How about you be courteous yourself when one disagrees with your points and don't insult other viewpoints? Maybe I'll do the same.

[Uxupox]

It's a principle of offensive. If such actions benefit the American public then yes it's good.

I fail to see how destabilizing Latin America has benefitted me.

Ask the President not me.

[Bakery Hill]

You keep being intellectually dishonest and refuse to properly explain yourself. I'm coming into this thread with good faith to exchange ideas and debate points, please be courteous enough to do the same.

How about you be courteous yourself when one disagrees with your points and don't insult other viewpoints? Maybe I'll do the same.

I'm not going to mollycoddle anyone. I fully acknowledge I can be abrasive in arguments. But I try and make my points as clear as possible and concede points when I've been proved wrong. You're doing neither of these things. You said it was a trash article and questioned its sources. When the sources were actively explained to you and proven to be legitimate, you backpedalled and refused to explain your reasoning. This is intellectually dishonest.

[Uxupox]

How about you be courteous yourself when one disagrees with your points and don't insult other viewpoints? Maybe I'll do the same.

I'm not going to mollycoddle anyone. I fully acknowledge I can be abrasive in arguments. But I try and make my points as clear as possible and concede points when I've been proved wrong. You're doing neither of these things. You said it was a trash article and questioned its sources. When the sources were actively explained to you and proven to be legitimate, you backpedalled and refused to explain your reasoning. This is intellectually dishonest.

I already gave my reasoning.

[Geilinor]

John Bolton is claiming that the Russian hacks might have actually been false flags staged by Obama. Good thing that he is no longer the frontrunner for Secretary of State.

[MERIZoC]

I fail to see how destabilizing Latin America has benefitted me.

Ask the President not me.

Good backpedal there, since you're the one who's been trying to justify Kelly's actions from square one.

[Bakery Hill]

I'm not going to mollycoddle anyone. I fully acknowledge I can be abrasive in arguments. But I try and make my points as clear as possible and concede points when I've been proved wrong. You're doing neither of these things. You said it was a trash article and questioned its sources. When the sources were actively explained to you and proven to be legitimate, you backpedalled and refused to explain your reasoning. This is intellectually dishonest.

I already gave my reasoning.

Mate, why are you doing this? You do know everything you've written here can be quoted back at you verbatim? You refused to explain yourself as can be seen:

1. What?
2. So first it was unsourced, now that it's proven it's fine? Backpedal backpedal backpedal.
3. Again what?

1) Exactly what I said.
2) Not backpedaling at all. It's a normality to see such actions in military espionage and intelligence warfare.
3) See number #1.

[Bakery Hill]

John Bolton is claiming that the Russian hacks might have actually been false flags staged by Obama. Good thing that he is no longer the frontrunner for Secretary of State.

His Order of Lenin is in the post.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Staffers at the Department Of Energy are a bit nervous after the Trump team passed around a 74-point questionnaire in which they were asked for the names of anyone and everyone currently working on climate change issues.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Staffers at the Department Of Energy are a bit nervous after the Trump team passed around a 74-point questionnaire in which they were asked for the names of anyone and everyone currently working on climate change issues.

Electors, please save the world from Trump.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Staffers at the Department Of Energy are a bit nervous after the Trump team passed around a 74-point questionnaire in which they were asked for the names of anyone and everyone currently working on climate change issues.

Fucking...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH THOSE FUCKING BASTARDS ARE GOING TO DESTROY ALL OUR FUCKING PROGRESS ON THIS SHIT WHY THE FUCK CAN'T HE JUST STOP THIS INSANE BULLSHIT!!!

[Washington Resistance Army]

Staffers at the Department Of Energy are a bit nervous after the Trump team passed around a 74-point questionnaire in which they were asked for the names of anyone and everyone currently working on climate change issues.

Electors, please save the world from Trump.

By electing Al Gore

[Arlenton]

"I like our ads. I like beautiful women eating burgers in bikinis. I think it's very American." -Andrew Puzder

I like Trump's Secretary of Labor nominee already!

[Arlenton]

Staffers at the Department Of Energy are a bit nervous after the Trump team passed around a 74-point questionnaire in which they were asked for the names of anyone and everyone currently working on climate change issues.

Fucking...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH THOSE FUCKING BASTARDS ARE GOING TO DESTROY ALL OUR FUCKING PROGRESS ON THIS SHIT WHY THE FUCK CAN'T HE JUST STOP THIS INSANE BULLSHIT!!!

Because his voters don't want him too.