Trump MAGAthread VI

[Cannot think of a name]

I have a feeling he doesn't know what that entails.

I don't even know what that entails.

Any enlightenment forthcoming?

Basing that on an old article.

[Izandai]

Doesn't that make it all the more important that you judge the incumbent and his policies on their own merits in the meantime?

No, Because he won't be running in 2020 against my moral compass, he'll be running in 2020 against a Democrat candidate. So I compare him to the most recent Democrat Candidate, as well as likely Democrats to run. Also, in the event that he gets impeached or primaried, other likely Republicans.

Why does it matter how present-day Trump stacks up against people that don't exist yet (candidates in an election years off)? It will certainly matter a great deal when that election is underway, but why does it matter right now?

[Geilinor]

Doesn't that make it all the more important that you judge the incumbent and his policies on their own merits in the meantime?

No, Because he won't be running in 2020 against my moral compass, he'll be running in 2020 against a Democrat candidate. So I compare him to the most recent Democrat Candidate, as well as likely Democrats to run. Also, in the event that he gets impeached or primaried, other likely Republicans.

Trump is the president and should be compared to other presidents.

[Thermodolia]

Here's a leaky iceberg:
Trump "confidants" say he will leave Paris Agreement

Does he knows where he got himself into?

Most likely not

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

Was terrified when I saw this thread and wondered how bad the discussion had gotten. Seems fairly tame for right now.

For now.

[Thermodolia]

Was terrified when I saw this thread and wondered how bad the discussion had gotten. Seems fairly tame for right now.

For now.

Dun dun dun!!!

[Sareva]

For now.

Dun dun dun!!!

I give it five hours.

[Ism]

Dun dun dun!!!

I give it five hours.

Ha, we can do it in four.

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

I give it five hours.

Ha, we can do it in four.

Ha, three it is.

[Farnhamia]

Ha, we can do it in four.

Ha, three it is.

*sings* One is the ...

Ahem.

Actually, the number you want to keep in mind is 8. That's the number of visible lines you can have in your signature. Spoilers count as 1.5-3 lines and lined items, such as boxes and quotes, add one line each for the top and bottom lines. If you need assistance in creating your signature, please visit the Sig Workshop.

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

Ha, three it is.

*sings* One is the ...

Ahem.

Actually, the number you want to keep in mind is 8. That's the number of visible lines you can have in your signature. Spoilers count as 1.5-3 lines and lined items, such as boxes and quotes, add one line each for the top and bottom lines. If you need assistance in creating your signature, please visit the Sig Workshop.

done

[Hittanryan]

I have a feeling he doesn't know what that entails.

I don't even know what that entails.

Any enlightenment forthcoming?

Maybe an old episode of Captain Planet happened to be on at the White House, Trump caught a glimpse of one of the villains, and he liked the sound of him.

[Corrian]

Past month ‘deadliest on record’ for Syrian civilians killed in US-led air strikes

Also the US admits to killing 100 civilians.

Who are the real terrorists at this point?

Also so much for voting for Trump for less intervention in Syria...How has that worked out, non-interventionalist Trump supporters?

It's going shitty, but It isn't really a negative in my book. I highly doubt Clinton would have been in any different spot than this.

The comparison that''s actually meaningful when approving of a President isn't what they have done vs. what they promised. Rather it's what they have done vs. what their opponent would have done.

I was kind of referring to the US in general there with its shitty foreign policy.

[Corrian]

Who are the real terrorists at this point?

...still ISIS. Come the fuck on.

Seems like we're terrorizing civilians quite a lot as well, so yeah. But that's nothing new at this point.

[Telconi]

It's going shitty, but It isn't really a negative in my book. I highly doubt Clinton would have been in any different spot than this.

The comparison that''s actually meaningful when approving of a President isn't what they have done vs. what they promised. Rather it's what they have done vs. what their opponent would have done.

I was kind of referring to the US in general there with its shitty foreign policy.

same answer

[Corrian]

I was kind of referring to the US in general there with its shitty foreign policy.

same answer

Yeah, they'd likely both suck in their own ways.

Still depressing. Feels like we accomplish little. Probably just emboldens some further.

[Senkaku]

...still ISIS. Come the fuck on.

Seems like we're terrorizing civilians quite a lot as well, so yeah. But that's nothing new at this point.

Yeah, sometimes we accidentally smack some civilians. It sucks. It's not at all comparable to terrorism, and please don't equate the two. When we start doing LeMay/Harris shit and actually targeting civilians, I'll be inclined to take you more seriously. Until then, feel free to read up on what aerial terror bombing would actually look like, so you know when to make comparisons that actually have any basis in reality.

Sure, but it's not actually relevant. Trump said he wouldn't do something that he is now doing. Hillary Clinton is irrelevant to this entire discussion. Stop using her as a crutch for your guy's failures now that he's in office- if y'all are gonna talk constantly about how the campaign is over and Trump is President, then you need to stop talking about what Hillary might have done if she had been elected.

Note that I don't support Trump, but I support the notion that we can compare to the other options.

She's not "another option." The election ended. She's not an option for the presidency. So no, face the facts that your man (for all you may not support him, you seem to spend a lot of your time defending him and his ilk) is a fucking moron, and stop whining about what HRC might have done instead had she been elected.

Here's a leaky iceberg:
Trump "confidants" say he will leave Paris Agreement

From: Gen Z
To: Baby Boomers
Re: climate change


Dear Baby Boomers,
Thanks for completely fucking us, you fuckers.

Fuck you,
Your Descendants

So the Norquist rule exists where Republican politicians aren't supposed to ever be in favor of tax increases. Well, I'm formally adopting a rule of my own from henchforth- Anyone who is in favor of Supply Side/Trickle Down economics, won't be getting my vote. I'll automatically be voting for their opponent, unless they support that as well. That is how strongly I feel about this issue.

It is the dumbest, most bullshit economic policy I've ever heard of, but worse- it has been tried and it has failed more than once. I never want to see a return to these policies in any form.

You know Sai, sometimes I almost think you're a Democrat in a brown shirt.

I was kind of referring to the US in general there with its shitty foreign policy.

Ah yes, we killed some civilians by accident in a war, and thus our entire foreign policy everywhere forever is shitty. TIL, thanks for keeping things in perspective, Corrian!

[Corrian]

Yeah, sometimes we accidentally smack some civilians. It sucks. It's not at all comparable to terrorism, and please don't equate the two. When we start doing LeMay/Harris shit and actually targeting civilians, I'll be inclined to take you more seriously. Until then, feel free to read up on what aerial terror bombing would actually look like, so you know when to make comparisons that actually have any basis in reality.

Yeah, us bombing 100's of people at once. Such a good job at our target picking there. If we didn't have an incompetent ass President making the calls on these strikes, maybe we wouldn't do them so idiotically. Or maybe we should get some better damn Intel before freaking bombing everything.

It still seems rather convenient that suddenly the deaths have gone up as the worst so far. There is clearly some incompetence involved in how we pull off our airstrikes at the moment.

Ah yes, we killed some civilians by accident in a war, and thus our entire foreign policy everywhere forever is shitty. TIL, thanks for keeping things in perspective, Corrian!

Well, it does suck, so yeah. Not just because of civilian deaths.

The fact people still support our foreign policy is actually almost more laughably amazing, since all it seems to lead into is an endless cycle of shit.

[Camicon]

Seems like we're terrorizing civilians quite a lot as well, so yeah. But that's nothing new at this point.

Yeah, sometimes we accidentally smack some civilians. It sucks. It's not at all comparable to terrorism, and please don't equate the two. When we start doing LeMay/Harris shit and actually targeting civilians, I'll be inclined to take you more seriously.
*snip*

Oh, bullshit. It may not be official US policy (though, with Trump in charge, it may become unofficial policy), but American military forces have been specifically killing civilians in the Middle East with impunity for a while now. And for the few that are discovered and prosecuted, like the platoon in the Rolling Stone article, how many do you figure fly under the radar?

Corrian's comments are less outlandish than you're portraying them, even if you ignore the bombing campaign, which I don't think you should. Dropping a bomb to kill a handful of legitimate targets, knowing that you're also going to catch many more innocents in the blast, doesn't justify the bombing. And while the intent might not be to advance political objectives through terror, to an extent that is actually happening.

[Uxupox]

Yeah, sometimes we accidentally smack some civilians. It sucks. It's not at all comparable to terrorism, and please don't equate the two. When we start doing LeMay/Harris shit and actually targeting civilians, I'll be inclined to take you more seriously.
*snip*

Oh, bullshit. It may not be official US policy (though, with Trump in charge, it may become unofficial policy), but American military forces have been specifically killing civilians in the Middle East with impunity for a while now. And for the few that are discovered and prosecuted, like the platoon in the Rolling Stone article, how many do you figure fly under the radar?

Corrian's comments are less outlandish than you're portraying them, even if you ignore the bombing campaign, which I don't think you should. Dropping a bomb to kill a handful of legitimate targets, knowing that you're also going to catch many more innocents in the blast, doesn't justify the bombing. And while the intent might not be to advance political objectives through terror, to an extent that is actually happening.

That's story is full of shit.

[Conserative Morality]

Oh, bullshit. It may not be official US policy (though, with Trump in charge, it may become unofficial policy), but American military forces have been specifically killing civilians in the Middle East with impunity for a while now. And for the few that are discovered and prosecuted, like the platoon in the Rolling Stone article, how many do you figure fly under the radar?

Corrian's comments are less outlandish than you're portraying them, even if you ignore the bombing campaign, which I don't think you should. Dropping a bomb to kill a handful of legitimate targets, knowing that you're also going to catch many more innocents in the blast, doesn't justify the bombing. And while the intent might not be to advance political objectives through terror, to an extent that is actually happening.

That's story is full of shit.

But a review of internal Army records and investigative files obtained by Rolling Stone, including dozens of interviews with members of Bravo Company compiled by military investigators, indicates that the dozen infantrymen being portrayed as members of a secretive "kill team" were operating out in the open, in plain view of the rest of the company. Far from being clandestine, as the Pentagon has implied, the murders of civilians were common knowledge among the unit and understood to be illegal by "pretty much the whole platoon," according to one soldier who complained about them. Staged killings were an open topic of conversation, and at least one soldier from another battalion in the 3,800-man Stryker Brigade participated in attacks on unarmed civilians. "The platoon has a reputation," a whistle-blower named Pfc. Justin Stoner told the Army Criminal Investigation Command. "They have had a lot of practice staging killings and getting away with it."

Because there are no bad apples in the military, no sir. A dozen morons and a slow hierarchy couldn't possibly exist within the US military.

[Uxupox]

That's story is full of shit.

But a review of internal Army records and investigative files obtained by Rolling Stone, including dozens of interviews with members of Bravo Company compiled by military investigators, indicates that the dozen infantrymen being portrayed as members of a secretive "kill team" were operating out in the open, in plain view of the rest of the company. Far from being clandestine, as the Pentagon has implied, the murders of civilians were common knowledge among the unit and understood to be illegal by "pretty much the whole platoon," according to one soldier who complained about them. Staged killings were an open topic of conversation, and at least one soldier from another battalion in the 3,800-man Stryker Brigade participated in attacks on unarmed civilians. "The platoon has a reputation," a whistle-blower named Pfc. Justin Stoner told the Army Criminal Investigation Command. "They have had a lot of practice staging killings and getting away with it."

Because there are no bad apples in the military, no sir. A dozen morons and a slow hierarchy couldn't possibly exist within the US military.

My confirmed sources in the white house tells me that story is full of shit.

[Conserative Morality]

My confirmed sources in the white house tells me that story is full of shit.

How convenient.

[Uxupox]

My confirmed sources in the white house tells me that story is full of shit.

How convenient.

It's a joke. My internal source is bullshit just like their review of "internal Army records".

[Maichuko]

The Chancellor of Germany said that America is no longer a reliable ally. I can't blame that logic. He'll suck up to the Saudi's, but be a prick our European allies.