The Biggest Trump Gaffs Never Make the News.

[ChrisL]

^ you did not address the point.

Yes I did. They would have more freedom than they do now. They would have it a lot better, and that is a fact. No more Mr. Nice Guy. That doesn't work either.

 

[FA_Q2]

Does the fact that I never mentioned how much freedom they have or how much better it would be even register with you?

AGAIN, would you be fine with Canada coming here and installing a puppet government because they thought you were better off?

AGAIN, how do you square your comments with the central concept of America being SELF GOVERNANCE?

 

[ChrisL]

Does the fact that I never mentioned how much freedom they have or how much better it would be even register with you?

AGAIN, would you be fine with Canada coming here and installing a puppet government because they thought you were better off?

AGAIN, how do you square your comments with the central concept of America being SELF GOVERNANCE?

No but we are successful at self governance.

 

[Care4all]

There was a thread on this topic back in August. But the Donald AGAIN repeated this outrageous idea in the 2nd Debate last week.

Trump Wants to Steal Middle East Oil, and He’s Not Alone

I've always said,” Donald Trump told Matt Lauer at the Commander-in-Chief Forum on Sept. 7, “take the oil.” It was a rare instance of Trump not exaggerating. Seizing Middle Eastern oil has always been one of Trump’s favorite foreign-policy refrains. In addition to the Sept. 7 forum, he voiced virtually the same words during the first presidential debate on Sept. 26, at a foreign-policy speech in Youngstown, Ohio, on Aug. 15, and in numerous campaign rallies during the spring and summer. And the pattern stretches back long before the presidential campaign.

Every time Trump utters the phrase today, his wording is essentially the same: While occupying Iraq, we should have seized its oil. This, of course, does not yet amount to a coherent foreign policy. But Trump’s nomination by the Republican Party obliges the American public to try to understand it as one — and to acknowledge that Trump is not the first prominent figure to propose the violent seizure, by U.S. military forces, of Middle Eastern oil fields. Reckless though the policy is, previous administrations have tiptoed to the precipice of pursuing it.

In the 2nd debate -- he upped the ante by including this brain fart in an answer of "what to do about ISIS"? Claimed that if we had taken the Iraqi oils and given them to Exxon-Mobil -- than ISIS would not have them NOW as a source of income.

Wrong in so many ways. The idea that a CIC can GIVE spoils of war to a single Amer. company. The lunacy of providing continual security for such an act. The FACT that many Intl treaties PROHIBIT such an action.

It shows how "instincts" could EASILY lead to a third World War. And how bravado can screw our relations with MEast players before he even gets elected. It's cluelessness and arrogance of the first order. Yet the national "dialogue/shouting match" doesn't allow for discussion of these MAJOR clueless gaffes..

View attachment 93501

Isn't that what the US government does by reserving all mineral rights for itself instead of allowing the US citizen who buys and discovers a valuable commodity on their property to gain from the sale?

That way they can give take the land (eminent domain) and give it to the big companies with little fuss or hassle from the landowner.

*****SMILE*****

isn't that State Law and each State is different, some land owners do have mineral rights...

 

[flacaltenn]

Which people would have better lives if we stayed where? And based on what metric? Would it be a 'trading freedom for safety' kind of dynamic?

Even if people would have better lives under US rule in some ways, that doesn't mean those people would appreciate a foreign nation taking over part of their country, nor does it mean other Mid-East nations would look at such a move favorably. I think that was flacaltenn's point.

Which people? All of them. Who cares what they feel? ISIS certainly doesn't.

Seriously? Who cares what they feel? You do know that we starved them of food and medicine for 12 years before Bush had the guts to "DO SOMETHING". Unfortunately, the thing he SHOULD have done is end the containment and walk away. But at least the 200,000 deaths during the containment policy got ended.

Mad Albright is on record saying that 200,000 dead Iraqis was "acceptable collateral damage". Are YOU that callous and ridiculous? I don't think so...

So, smarty pants . . . you realize that we have a "global economy" nowadays, right? What do you do with a nation who controls one of the MOST precious natural resources and who will not cooperate, who attacks his neighbors? What do you do?

We FIXED that. We chased Saddam out of Kuwait and destroyed his army. They need customers for their oil. And that's pretty much ALL they got to offer. We don't have to invade, occupy, and leave ANY more bombed out voids in that region for terrorists to breed in. WE created that problem with our stupid dreams of having Democracies and upgrading their cultures from the 13th Century.. Just stay the fuck out unless they shoot at us or steal from us. OR -- at a minimum --- at LEAST get INVITED in to help...

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

 

[ChrisL]

Which people? All of them. Who cares what they feel? ISIS certainly doesn't.

Seriously? Who cares what they feel? You do know that we starved them of food and medicine for 12 years before Bush had the guts to "DO SOMETHING". Unfortunately, the thing he SHOULD have done is end the containment and walk away. But at least the 200,000 deaths during the containment policy got ended.

Mad Albright is on record saying that 200,000 dead Iraqis was "acceptable collateral damage". Are YOU that callous and ridiculous? I don't think so...

So, smarty pants . . . you realize that we have a "global economy" nowadays, right? What do you do with a nation who controls one of the MOST precious natural resources and who will not cooperate, who attacks his neighbors? What do you do?

We FIXED that. We chased Saddam out of Kuwait and destroyed his army. They need customers for their oil. And that's pretty much ALL they got to offer. We don't have to invade, occupy, and leave ANY more bombed out voids in that region for terrorists to breed in. WE created that problem with our stupid dreams of having Democracies and upgrading their cultures from the 13th Century.. Just stay the fuck out unless they shoot at us or steal from us. OR -- at a minimum --- at LEAST get INVITED in to help...

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

That doesn't change the facts. The facts are that those people would be much better off today if we had occupied their nation, whether they realize it or not.

 

[ChrisL]

Which people? All of them. Who cares what they feel? ISIS certainly doesn't.

Seriously? Who cares what they feel? You do know that we starved them of food and medicine for 12 years before Bush had the guts to "DO SOMETHING". Unfortunately, the thing he SHOULD have done is end the containment and walk away. But at least the 200,000 deaths during the containment policy got ended.

Mad Albright is on record saying that 200,000 dead Iraqis was "acceptable collateral damage". Are YOU that callous and ridiculous? I don't think so...

So, smarty pants . . . you realize that we have a "global economy" nowadays, right? What do you do with a nation who controls one of the MOST precious natural resources and who will not cooperate, who attacks his neighbors? What do you do?

We FIXED that. We chased Saddam out of Kuwait and destroyed his army. They need customers for their oil. And that's pretty much ALL they got to offer. We don't have to invade, occupy, and leave ANY more bombed out voids in that region for terrorists to breed in. WE created that problem with our stupid dreams of having Democracies and upgrading their cultures from the 13th Century.. Just stay the fuck out unless they shoot at us or steal from us. OR -- at a minimum --- at LEAST get INVITED in to help...

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

You yourself have said that they NEED a brutal dictator. Are we worse than a brutal dictator? No, we are not. Many of those killed by ISIS would be alive today.

 

[flacaltenn]

Seriously? Who cares what they feel? You do know that we starved them of food and medicine for 12 years before Bush had the guts to "DO SOMETHING". Unfortunately, the thing he SHOULD have done is end the containment and walk away. But at least the 200,000 deaths during the containment policy got ended.

Mad Albright is on record saying that 200,000 dead Iraqis was "acceptable collateral damage". Are YOU that callous and ridiculous? I don't think so...

So, smarty pants . . . you realize that we have a "global economy" nowadays, right? What do you do with a nation who controls one of the MOST precious natural resources and who will not cooperate, who attacks his neighbors? What do you do?

We FIXED that. We chased Saddam out of Kuwait and destroyed his army. They need customers for their oil. And that's pretty much ALL they got to offer. We don't have to invade, occupy, and leave ANY more bombed out voids in that region for terrorists to breed in. WE created that problem with our stupid dreams of having Democracies and upgrading their cultures from the 13th Century.. Just stay the fuck out unless they shoot at us or steal from us. OR -- at a minimum --- at LEAST get INVITED in to help...

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

You yourself have said that they NEED a brutal dictator. Are we worse than a brutal dictator? No, we are not. Many of those killed by ISIS would be alive today.

OMG.. You think America is GREAT at supplying brutal regimes to REPRESS and pillage a foreign country? Is THAT the role you WANT your country to play?

 

[flacaltenn]

And to what PURPOSE would we ever DO that ChrisL?

 

[ChrisL]

So, smarty pants . . . you realize that we have a "global economy" nowadays, right? What do you do with a nation who controls one of the MOST precious natural resources and who will not cooperate, who attacks his neighbors? What do you do?

We FIXED that. We chased Saddam out of Kuwait and destroyed his army. They need customers for their oil. And that's pretty much ALL they got to offer. We don't have to invade, occupy, and leave ANY more bombed out voids in that region for terrorists to breed in. WE created that problem with our stupid dreams of having Democracies and upgrading their cultures from the 13th Century.. Just stay the fuck out unless they shoot at us or steal from us. OR -- at a minimum --- at LEAST get INVITED in to help...

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

You yourself have said that they NEED a brutal dictator. Are we worse than a brutal dictator? No, we are not. Many of those killed by ISIS would be alive today.

OMG.. You think America is GREAT at supplying brutal regimes to REPRESS and pillage a foreign country? Is THAT the role you WANT your country to play?

Stop being silly. I didn't say that at all. I'm saying they would be better off. Do you disagree?

 

[ChrisL]

And to what PURPOSE would we ever DO that ChrisL?

To stabilize that portion of the world and the global economy. It's an absolute hell hole over there.

 

[flacaltenn]

We FIXED that. We chased Saddam out of Kuwait and destroyed his army. They need customers for their oil. And that's pretty much ALL they got to offer. We don't have to invade, occupy, and leave ANY more bombed out voids in that region for terrorists to breed in. WE created that problem with our stupid dreams of having Democracies and upgrading their cultures from the 13th Century.. Just stay the fuck out unless they shoot at us or steal from us. OR -- at a minimum --- at LEAST get INVITED in to help...

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

You yourself have said that they NEED a brutal dictator. Are we worse than a brutal dictator? No, we are not. Many of those killed by ISIS would be alive today.

OMG.. You think America is GREAT at supplying brutal regimes to REPRESS and pillage a foreign country? Is THAT the role you WANT your country to play?

Stop being silly. I didn't say that at all. I'm saying they would be better off. Do you disagree?

Better off with folks spouting off about not giving a fuck what the Iraqis care? You did say that. And I'm aghast at it. You need to examine your callous attitude towards the Millions of lives that your opinion affect. You think they'd ever LOVE a country that locks them up for 12 years and cuts off food and medicine and KILLS 200,000 of their relatives and fellow citizens? Very disappointed you feel the US should be abusing entire countries like that. .

 

[flacaltenn]

And to what PURPOSE would we ever DO that ChrisL?

To stabilize that portion of the world and the global economy. It's an absolute hell hole over there.

Iraq was one of the MORE stable countries in that region before we locked them in containment. SO stable in fact that they were the PRINCIPLE HEDGE against Iranian power. Saddam KEPT the Iranians out of power in that area. NOW --- the Iranians literally control 1/3 of the country !!!! So stable that Saddam THOUGHT he could invade Kuwait and get away with it.

Kicking his ass OUT of Kuwait was a well contained role for us. I have no problem with that. Primarily because the Kuwaitis ASKED US to help. But you seem to think we were making them into some kind of conquered territory. Must be why you don't understand how dangerous and arrogant this Trump vision is.....

 

[ChrisL]

We shouldn't go unless there is something in it for us. HOWEVER, once we already went there, it was kind of important to keep our interests safe! We lost all of those lives and all of that money, and for what?

Tell me.. What WAS the "end goal"? And what did you EXPECT to achieve? That's the point here. The Democracy spreaders were totally NAIVE and wrong about reforming Arab culture and political structure. No amount of time, blood and money was ever gonna fix that problem and there are still SEVERAL civil wars to be fought in Iraq to the restore the stability that we smashed.

And if we had taken their oil and given it to Exxon-Mobil, the elections and support for ANY GOVERNMENT would be more of a farce than they turned out to be. It would have turned from a contested occupation and govt transition to outright insurrection and revolt. If it's possible, the Trump idea was MONUMENTALLY stupider than our lack of ability to see our way OUT of the occupation.

Don't think you're really pondering what it means when a foreign country bombs you and kills you daily for 12 years, then invades and starts pillaging your country for another 12. That leaves ZERO CHANCE of any transition to local govt and no end in sight for our end point withdrawal..

But you just continue to "turn off" and accuse me of going "liberal". And making ridiculous statements like "who cares what THEY think". It's insane. Just like this entire election and what the public is fixated on.

You yourself have said that they NEED a brutal dictator. Are we worse than a brutal dictator? No, we are not. Many of those killed by ISIS would be alive today.

OMG.. You think America is GREAT at supplying brutal regimes to REPRESS and pillage a foreign country? Is THAT the role you WANT your country to play?

Stop being silly. I didn't say that at all. I'm saying they would be better off. Do you disagree?

Better off with folks spouting off about not giving a fuck what the Iraqis care? You did say that. And I'm aghast at it. You need to examine your callous attitude towards the Millions of lives that your opinion affect. You think they'd ever LOVE a country that locks them up for 12 years and cuts off food and medicine and KILLS 200,000 of their relatives and fellow citizens? Very disappointed you feel the US should be abusing entire countries like that. .

Sometimes parents have to do things that the kids don't like. Lol. Stop throwing a liberal hissy fit, please. Thanks.

 

[ChrisL]

And to what PURPOSE would we ever DO that ChrisL?

To stabilize that portion of the world and the global economy. It's an absolute hell hole over there.

Iraq was one of the MORE stable countries in that region before we locked them in containment. SO stable in fact that they were the PRINCIPLE HEDGE against Iranian power. Saddam KEPT the Iranians out of power in that area. NOW --- the Iranians literally control 1/3 of the country !!!! So stable that Saddam THOUGHT he could invade Kuwait and get away with it.

Kicking his ass OUT of Kuwait was a well contained role for us. I have no problem with that. Primarily because the Kuwaitis ASKED US to help. But you seem to think we were making them into some kind of conquered territory. Must be why you don't understand how dangerous and arrogant this Trump vision is.....

Not if you know about the things Saddam Hussein did to his own people, his own family even. Torture, rape, murder and everything in between.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Which people would have better lives if we stayed where? And based on what metric? Would it be a 'trading freedom for safety' kind of dynamic?

Even if people would have better lives under US rule in some ways, that doesn't mean those people would appreciate a foreign nation taking over part of their country, nor does it mean other Mid-East nations would look at such a move favorably. I think that was flacaltenn's point.

Which people? All of them. Who cares what they feel? ISIS certainly doesn't.

Seriously? Who cares what they feel? You do know that we starved them of food and medicine for 12 years before Bush had the guts to "DO SOMETHING". Unfortunately, the thing he SHOULD have done is end the containment and walk away. But at least the 200,000 deaths during the containment policy got ended.

Mad Albright is on record saying that 200,000 dead Iraqis was "acceptable collateral damage". Are YOU that callous and ridiculous? I don't think so...

So, smarty pants . . . you realize that we have a "global economy" nowadays, right? What do you do with a nation who controls one of the MOST precious natural resources and who will not cooperate, who attacks his neighbors? What do you do?

Only a Fool Believes in History and Ethics Written by the Establishment's Flunkies

Saddam was producing beyond his quotas and lowering the world price of oil. This cut into the American oil companies' obscene profit margins. They ordered Bush, Sr. to attack him for invading the illegitimate country of Kuwait, which had always belonged to Iraq/Mesopotamia.

After that Exxon-ordered war, Saddam violated his sanctions quotas on oil and drove transnational petrocracy's profits down again. This time, Bush, Jr., used 9/11 as an excuse to attack him again. The result was 11 years of high oil prices, the main cause of all our recessions since the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo.

Oh, so Saddam Hussein - good. United States - bad? Good grief. Some of you people are just insane. Sad really.

Allah Is All About OIl

Since when does the GreedHead petrocratic Establishment represent the United States? Real Americans got enormous economic benefits from Saddam's driving down oil prices, whatever his selfish motivations were.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

There was a thread on this topic back in August. But the Donald AGAIN repeated this outrageous idea in the 2nd Debate last week.

Trump Wants to Steal Middle East Oil, and He’s Not Alone

I've always said,” Donald Trump told Matt Lauer at the Commander-in-Chief Forum on Sept. 7, “take the oil.” It was a rare instance of Trump not exaggerating. Seizing Middle Eastern oil has always been one of Trump’s favorite foreign-policy refrains. In addition to the Sept. 7 forum, he voiced virtually the same words during the first presidential debate on Sept. 26, at a foreign-policy speech in Youngstown, Ohio, on Aug. 15, and in numerous campaign rallies during the spring and summer. And the pattern stretches back long before the presidential campaign.

Every time Trump utters the phrase today, his wording is essentially the same: While occupying Iraq, we should have seized its oil. This, of course, does not yet amount to a coherent foreign policy. But Trump’s nomination by the Republican Party obliges the American public to try to understand it as one — and to acknowledge that Trump is not the first prominent figure to propose the violent seizure, by U.S. military forces, of Middle Eastern oil fields. Reckless though the policy is, previous administrations have tiptoed to the precipice of pursuing it.

In the 2nd debate -- he upped the ante by including this brain fart in an answer of "what to do about ISIS"? Claimed that if we had taken the Iraqi oils and given them to Exxon-Mobil -- than ISIS would not have them NOW as a source of income.

Wrong in so many ways. The idea that a CIC can GIVE spoils of war to a single Amer. company. The lunacy of providing continual security for such an act. The FACT that many Intl treaties PROHIBIT such an action.

It shows how "instincts" could EASILY lead to a third World War. And how bravado can screw our relations with MEast players before he even gets elected. It's cluelessness and arrogance of the first order. Yet the national "dialogue/shouting match" doesn't allow for discussion of these MAJOR clueless gaffes..

Bright Makes Right and Bright Makes Might

Resources belong to the advanced intellects who have the ability to discover their use, not to dumb savages like the rabid Arab rabble. "Use It or Lose It" is the only way the fittest can lead. The rest can benefit; no reason to exterminate them unless they are parasites and lazily insist that the intelligent become their providers.

What is natural to Low IQ beasts is what happened after we violated these laws of evolution. They formed an illegal price-gouging cartel with the wealth that they never earned. Ignorant, weak, and decadent multiculturalists allowed the Neanderthals to use the oil giveaway to advance an economic and terrorist jihad. The traitors who insist that the Third World greedy and bloodthirsty savages have equal rights must be dealt with harshly before productive nations can move forward to their natural destiny.

oh brother...

advanced intellects don't plow through the world running over soverign countries and stealing their natural resources because they deem themselves "advanced intellects" .... actions like that lower the US to terrorist levels, and make us no better than they are.

Homo Sapiens V. Homo Erectus: The Final Chapter

In whose interest is it to make High IQs into sissy pushovers, like you want them to be? Only mindless parrots squawk such insulting ethics.

my ethics .... that's rich.

your imagination is unfettered by lawless logic.

sage? it doesn't show.

How pompous and obnoxious to refer to your own self as a "sage" anyways. Everyone here seems to think they know what's going on even when they don't.

Ambitious Imbeciles

I dare to find the authorities you look up to as pompous, obnoxious, and snobbish intellectual bullies. Hate to tell you this about your Good Shepherds, but, despite their pretense of leadership, they're out to fleece you and turn you into lamb chops.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump is right.

Trump is just another goofy right winger.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

There isn't a moderate MidEast state that isn't gonna shun us as pillagers and thieves. I hope you can see the reputation damage from such a stupid "plan". That's ABOVE the logistics of actually PROTECTING those stolen assets. The US becomes the mafia and it WILL BE the bigger threat to them than ISIS..

IF we had stayed there and if we were in control of things, those people would have MUCH better lives. Let's be real.

Not at all. You're propping up a FANTASY of a Democratic Iraq. That was never gonna happen. And by removing Saddam, you created permanent sectorial frictions between Sunni, Shia and Kurds.

Their lives did NOT improve after 12 years of occupation. And it did not improve for the PREVIOUS 12 years when we bombing Saddam DAILY and locking up their economy. WE are responsible for over 400,000 deaths in that country since we started the no-flys and containment in the late 80s. They didn't love us then. And they CERTAINLY are never gonna be grateful for destroying their country.

If we took over that country, those people would be a whole heck of a lot better off than they are now, no?

Irrelevant.

Would you be fine with Candida walking in this nation and setting up a puppet government because they thought you were 'better off?' I think not. Why should they accept such a thing?

One of the cornerstone of our government - one of the reasons that it exists - is the firm belief in self governance. What does that say when you walk into other nations and attempt to control them? It certainly does not speak to actual American values.

What is Candida? I believe that is a bacteria.

!

As with anybody who looks up to Diploma Dumbos as role models for language, you're too lazy to learn the educated forms on your own. Bacteria is plural, so if you wanted to sound intelligent, you should have written, "I believe that is a bacterium."

 

[Unkotare]

...
As with anybody who looks up to Diploma Dumbos as role models for language.....

Dropout drug-boy is just sad. Look at painfully obvious inferiority complex.