Can any snowflake explain this?

[easyt65]

Anyways, as the shit continues to hit the fan, stand by what you've been saying for 8 years. That's all I ask.

The fact that there was never any reason to go to war with / in Syria, as Trump demonstrated last night, and my belief that we should quickly get the hell out of Syria now? No problem - I will stick with that.

Hell, EVEN HILLARY was smart enough to come to that conclusion and agree with Trump:

'Hillary Clinton called for bombing of Syrian airfields'

Even SHE would have enforced OBAMA's 'Red Line'...NOT DRAGGED THE US INTO A CIVIL WAR ON HER OWN.

 

[danielpalos]

The right wing claims to believe in laissez-fair. Laissez-fair foreign policy!

Most of the time you can tell when people are full of shit - it's when THEY attempt to speak for other people / groups and say things like, "They believe", "The Right believes', "The Left believes"....

They try to put words in others mouths so they will have something to rail against.

I am not necessarily talking about you, just saying....

Laissez-fair foreign policy!

 

[Timmy]

For years righties shit all over obamas foreign policy . Now trump is in office and his policy is no different.

 

[danielpalos]

As Trump escalates the fuck out of Syria ....

HOW THE HELL CAN A ONE-TIME AIR STRIKE ON A SYRIAN AIRBASE FROM WHICH A CHEMICAL WEAPONS ATTACK WAS LAUNCHED IN SYRIA ESCALATE AN ON-GOING WAR IN WHICH US TROOPS ARE ON THE GROUND AS PART OF AN INVASION FORCE?


View attachment 120753

Trump has also increased the number of troops in Syria and will no longer report how many troops are there. Fun times.

Anyways, as the shit continues to hit the fan, stand by what you've been saying for 8 years. That's all I ask.

Should we insist on auditing the general government, instead of the Fed?

The power to provide for the common defense is not the power to wage war or provide for the general warfare, nor even to promote the common offense.

 

[easyt65]

I see the snowflakes have latched onto the Liberal anti-Trump 'Wag The Dog' talking point.

IF the use of chemical weapons against women and children was ever a 'Wag the Dog' scenario then it began when it happened during Obama's time in office, and he was the 1st one to engage in it, issuing his 'Red Line'.

Murdering women and children through the use of chemical weapons, though, is far from such 'political theater' or 'political excuse-making'. The attacks appropriately drew world-wide condemnation.

Obama was not wrong to be outraged by the events. His response to the 1st uses of chemical weapons by Assad (OUTRAGE) was not some 'Wag the Dog' scenario but an appropriate response to the use of chemical weapons against innocent people...just like Trump's was last night.

He was not wrong to tell Assad such actions would not be tolerated after the 1st incident. I personally would not have issued a 'Red Line', especially if I was not serious about it and had no intention of following through if 'my' bluff - if that was what it was - was called.

Once he issued his 'Red Line' and after chemical weapons were used a 2nd time he was pretty much obligated to do SOMETHING...rather than back down in front of the whole world, to include our enemies.

Dragging the United states into the middle of a civil war between a Putin-Backed dictator and ISIS, however, was the wrong move...AS TRUMP DEMONSTRATED LAST NIGHT.

All that was ever required was a one-time proportional military strike to send a message that such behavior will not be tolerated.

 

[easyt65]

For years righties shit all over obamas foreign policy . Now trump is in office and his policy is no different.

It is Obama's failed policies that have us where we are today....in the middle of a civil war between a Russian-backed dictator and ISIS, with US combat troops on the ground in Syria - part of an 'invasion force' that was never asked there by the President of Syria - on a dumbass IMPOSSIBLE mission of 'regime change'...impossible as long as Putin chooses to protect him. THAT means the US military is there having no achievable goal .. so why are we there?

To 'defeat' ISIS? Again - failed foreign policy: Perhaps it would have been a good idea if Obama had not chosen to finance, supply, arm, train, defend, and protect ISIS in the 1st place.... 'Don't feed the cockroaches' if you really want them gone'!

 

[Meane]

This snowflake respects the strike. I am worried we could be dragged into the middle of a very complex war for who knows how long.. but assad needs to face consequences.

We have already been dragged into another complex war - a civil war between a Russian-supported dictator and terrorist ISIS.

The ONLY thing that ever needed to be done right off the bat, after the 2nd use of chemical weapons by Assad was what Trump did - a definitive, timely tactical strike in response to the use of chemical weapons. There was NEVER a reason to go to war and put combat boots on the ground in Syria. Every expert 'out there' will tell you Putin was NEVER going to let Assad fall.

Well the experts are wrong. Assad will fall. To Putin he is like a temporary bargaining chip. He will use Assad on every turn as an excuse, a threat, a bribe, an ally and an enemy. An then in the end he lets him hang when he is no longer necessary.

 

[Meane]

Because Trump hasn't the trust.

And because, though Trump did "what Obama was supposed to do"(to which i dont agree) , he and no one for that matter have any idea what will follow.

You don't go into war to Syria of which Putin has warned so many times and think "we'll just throw one in as we pass and then let it go".

Of course he did it because Putin asked him to so it isn't so exactly, but that is what it looks like to people now.

 

[easyt65]

. Every expert 'out there' will tell you Putin was NEVER going to let Assad fall.

Well the experts are wrong.

Yes because snowflakes know better than anyone.

 

[Meane]

. Every expert 'out there' will tell you Putin was NEVER going to let Assad fall.

Well the experts are wrong.

Yes because snowflakes know better than anyone.

Nice argument.

 

[easyt65]

. Every expert 'out there' will tell you Putin was NEVER going to let Assad fall.

Well the experts are wrong.

Yes because snowflakes know better than anyone.

Nice argument.

Of course you like that argument - it's yours.

 

[Meane]

I see the snowflakes have latched onto the Liberal anti-Trump 'Wag The Dog' talking point.

IF the use of chemical weapons against women and children was ever a 'Wag the Dog' scenario then it began when it happened during Obama's time in office, and he was the 1st one to engage in it, issuing his 'Red Line'.

Murdering women and children through the use of chemical weapons, though, is far from such 'political theater' or 'political excuse-making'. The attacks appropriately drew world-wide condemnation.

Obama was not wrong to be outraged by the events. His response to the 1st uses of chemical weapons by Assad (OUTRAGE) was not some 'Wag the Dog' scenario but an appropriate response to the use of chemical weapons against innocent people...just like Trump's was last night.

He was not wrong to tell Assad such actions would not be tolerated after the 1st incident. I personally would not have issued a 'Red Line', especially if I was not serious about it and had no intention of following through if 'my' bluff - if that was what it was - was called.

Once he issued his 'Red Line' and after chemical weapons were used a 2nd time he was pretty much obligated to do SOMETHING...rather than back down in front of the whole world, to include our enemies.

Dragging the United states into the middle of a civil war between a Putin-Backed dictator and ISIS, however, was the wrong move...AS TRUMP DEMONSTRATED LAST NIGHT.

All that was ever required was a one-time proportional military strike to send a message that such behavior will not be tolerated.

Do you mean that now it's done, the message?

Putin never left room for that. The reason Obama didn't follow through his plan - which I'm sure he had much farther than Trump does now - is because Putin interrupted him on every road.

Now there were ways to go round it, but Obama can hardly be blamed for reacting like 999 out of a 1000 would have. Act don't react may have done something, but eventually that road would have been lit on fire by Russia as well so he would have had to have the guts to let it burn. And i suppose that goes against his principles.