"To be frank, I was led to believe that I would receive serious consideration to be moderator of a military sub-forum on P-F.com"
"To be frank, I was led to believe that I would receive serious consideration to be moderator of a military sub-forum on P-F.com"
There's nothing civil about this war.
Let's try to keep it relevant in here, gents.
Who will step up to be SecDef now? To my mind, SecDef and SecState are the two most critical positions within an administration. Unfortunately, Trump has gone and fucked it up losing first Tillerson and now Mattis. Those two men were brilliant at their jobs. For a man who is supposed to be a fucking managerial/business whiz, Trump sure has a hard time keeping good employees.
I worry about this, because Trump has the foreign policy tact of a baboon who just got done throwing feces at the wall and has now decided to start masturbating in front of the crowd at the zoo. He is fucking clueless about what is going on around the world most of the time and things like him being ignored by critical heads of state clearly shows that Mattis is right, Trump is a fucking cartoon to most of the world and he is not working with our critical allies.
As for the shit talk about UK, France, and Germany - man, I didn't see Russian soldiers dying in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban. I mean, unless you count the first time we were in Afghanistan, training the Mujh.
The House passed national concealed carry reciprocity a year ago.Originally Posted by GuanoLoco
So now Trump is responsible for the inaction of the Senate?!
Last edited by BillSWPA; 12-20-2018 at 10:35 PM.
Trump will never get anything accomplished because the entire organizational apparatus of 'Western Democracy' is stacked up against him. Like he's supposed to be able to focus on letting you keep your bumpstocks when he's dealing (on a daily basis) with things like his young son being exposed to images of hideous comediennes holding his dad's severed head???
When someone can articulate why our providing support to ISIS in Syria helps us as Americans, why Afghanistan is an ally of ours when referring to it as a functioning country is a stretch, or why we should be standing by as England thwarts their people's desire to exit the EU while installing the closest approximation to Orwell's Airstrip One… then maybe I'll take the caterwauling seriously.
Hopefully, Mattis will move back home to Richland and run for Governor. (Dare to dream -- but tired of the same old same olds running for statewide office on the Republican side)...
Last edited by idahojess; 12-20-2018 at 10:43 PM.
He is certainly quick to use the power of his Presidential bully-pulpit when it is something he cares about.
If he could ramrod through Kavanaugh, why did he take a hard pass on CC Recipricity, HPA, etc.? News flash: Because he doesn’t support it!
Mattis saw that he is more worried about manipulating public opinion and pandering to his base in the immediate term thatn listening to reason. The notion of addressing complex problems with a coherent strategy, well executed over time, it utterly foreign to Trump - and Mattis is over it.
Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Doodie Project?
Your positions are incoherent, bizare, and lack a basis in reality. Let me explain why, point by point.
This is just hilarious and doesn't deserve a serious response.
1. Why is ISIS a threat to the United States?? Gee, I have no idea. Too bad US interventions in hasn't been, you know, remarkably effective or anything.
Since the airstrikes started, ISIL has been losing ground in both Iraq and Syria. [...]
As of December 2017, ISIL is estimated to control no territory in Iraq, and 5% of Syrian territory, after prolonged actions.[270] On 9 December 2017, Iraq declared victory in the fight against ISIL and stated that the war in Iraq was over.[271][272] Consequently, at the end of 2017, territorially ISIL was mainly defeated.2. This is a confusing and childish statement. Are you saying that we should not be allied with the government that nearly 2400 Americans have died to establish and defend since the 2001 invasion? Are we supposed to not support them in their (admittedly minimally successful) efforts to establish something resembling a democracy after fighting the longest war in US history?
Keep in mind I am not advocating we necessarily maintain a military presence in this country - I just completely do not understand why you think we should not be their ally. Maybe the same reason as France and Germany? They called us names, or something? Truly don't get it.
3. ...what do you expect that we do instead? Land Marines on the shores of the Thames?
In one breath you advocate that we withdraw a small, highly efficient military detachment that is actively involved in defeating a terrorist organization that once controlled a territory nearly 300,000 square kilometers with a population of nearly 10 million people because it doesn't help us, and in another you suggest that we somehow use our influence to intervene in the peaceful political processes of one of our oldest allies.
Your shit doesn't make sense dude. Please read a book.
Last edited by Nephrology; 12-20-2018 at 11:24 PM.
Huh?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds like a case for my good friend
Vitamine H?
Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Doodie Project?
Reply With Quote