Trump And Iran

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Take out the words "small chance" and replace them with the words, "very serious chance" and this would be about right!
^ this is why we have the most unfit president in US history in the White House.
This is the best one liner that describes the Trump Administration. There are few words that come close to the word "unfit." Adding "the most" clarifies just how bad Trump may be.

I've pondered that words "most unfit." There is no phrase or terms that state just how incompetent Trump is except for "most unfit."

As long as "this most unfit president in US history" is still the president, the worst is yet to come.

I have feared that the US would turn from a republic to an empire very much like Ancient Rome. I really expected the US Republic to be one of the super powers of the world until 2100 and still be a republic, not a fascist totalitarian state.

Alas, I didn't count on the US electing someone as president that is as unfit for office as Trump is. I really didn't suspect that the US would turn from a democratic nation to a fascist state at a time when the economy was performing adequately.

Furthermore, I suspect that there will never be a person as unfit as Donald Trump to become the president of the United States.

Trump sets the standard for all time as how low unfit a person can be as the President of the United States.
 

ripsrips

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Posts
1,315
Media
10
Likes
2,464
Points
443
Location
California (United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
I'm okay with President Trump killing a terrorist in Iraq, not his home country.
I just wanted to throwup watching all the news coverage about a dead terrorist with all these FAKE mourners.

My brothers wife is Iranian and lived in Iran during the Iran Embassy Siege, she was 14 years old at the time.
The army would make entire families go out and protest against the USA and most importantly the world TV audience.
Her uncle refused to go and they beat him within an inch of his life, he still suffers from headaches and no feeling in his right arm and is blind in his left eye, all because he didn't believe in the radical terrorist mullahs.
My brothers wife still has family there and they told her they are still forced to protest and FAKE cry whenever there is a camera.
The vast majority of Iranians hate the mullahs and don't look at the USA as evil.
They only act that way if they want to survive.
Believe the pictures if you want because they are lies, our media is corrupt on the topic.
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,948
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
And Bin Laden was struck so that Obama would look tough on terrorism. I really do not see much difference. Both targets were terrorists, that cannot be questioned..

You're slow, so I'll try to use tiny words. Bin Laden attacked the U.S. on U.S. soil. Not going after him would be like not going after Hitler. He was still leading his terror network. That's the difference - W. and the GOP gave up because they could not find him. Obama found him and took action - it was risky - Biden was opposed because he felt if the mission failed it would hurt the re-election effort. Trump only acted to help his effort. When Carter was bold with Iran it blew up and we looked weak. Obama finished the job - which was THE ONLY REASON we ever invaded Afghanistan. No one claimed that the General was a good guy, but his killing was a fit of pique by a criminal president who wanted to show Nancy his dick still worked. The consequences are beginning. We have been asked to leave Iraq, which makes us vulnerable there and increases Russia's influence in a critical region, and as I write this a U.S. Military base is under fire. Good job Don - Idiot.
 

AdamHenry

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Posts
615
Media
0
Likes
1,354
Points
163
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
And Bin Laden was struck so that Obama would look tough on terrorism. I really do not see much difference. Both targets were terrorists, that cannot be questioned..

Wrong. Bin Laden was located, Obama was briefed. He was given options, and he made the right call. This looking tough part is in your imagination. He had a job to do and he did it. Trump was given many options also and he took the most severe because he's a knucklehead. Most likely against his military advisors. Bin Laden was not a leading member of any government. This guy was. There's a way to cut out cancer without burning the entire body. Trump burned the body.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
We can discuss the pros and cons of taking out this general until the cows come home.

My biggest concern is on what basis was this action taken and for what purpose.

Is this action a result of the rule of law or was this action taken as a rule of Trump?

And for what purpose? To further the political agenda of Trump or to further American interests in the world?

All actions by the US government should follow the rule of law with the law being based on the US Constitution.

All foreign actions by our government should be done to further American interests or further democracy and the rule of law.

We should never ask people to die so we can further the political career of a person or group of people.

Congress has sole power to declare war. That has been enshrined in the US Constitution from the beginning.

Had American troops been attacked, of course, those troops should do what is absolutely necessary to protect the forces that are being attacked on the ground and in that region.

What Trump has done is considered by the international world as an act of war. This was a top Iranian general that we used a drone to kill him. Not some tribal chief out in some desert somewhere.

Suppose for a moment, that the the Iranians made a direct attack on the US killing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We would consider that an act of war.

The proper response for Trump if Iran attacked American forces would have been for Trump to get authority from Congress to take out Iran military. This can be obtained within hours if necessary.

Without that authority, an attempt to round up any persons here in the US responsible for the attack on the US is about all that Trump could do, that is, if Trump is being the chief executive officer of the US under the rule of law, not the US under the rule of Trump.

It has been a week and Congress hasn't been informed of what was done, why, and what the alternatives would have been if this apparent act of war was not carried out.

Once again, Trump is following the dictates of Trump without any pretense of following constitutional law.

Once Congress and the people are notified to all the circumstances (without endangering any Americans) and if Trump asks Congress and Congress approves then we will be under the rule of law and Trump have the authority to began an offensive against Iran or other rogue nation.

There has not been any indication that there was any immediate danger by the US choosing to not carry out an act of war against Iran by the US assassinating the top general of another nation.

WWI was a horrible war resulting in the deaths of millions of people. The major nations of the world stumbled into WWI as a result of an assassination.

At the time, no one suspected that the world was headed for a world war.

Perhaps, this general needed to be taken out. This should have been directed from the entire military with authority from Congress.

Without information coming from Our Dear Leader Donald the First, we are left to our own suspicions why.

Consider: Abrumpty, Trump turned against the Kurds and gave to Russia a large part of Syria. What else was going on at the time? Trump was being impeached by the House. That is what was going on. Trump made this decision all by himself without reviewing it with his military experts.

Why? To create a diversion from the impeachment by the House.

Is there anything happening now that is similar to the Syria disaster? As a matter of fact there is. The trial of Trump is about to start in the Senate. Would Trump start a war to detract the Congress and the American people away from that trial?

The tragic news is that, yes, that is exactly what I think happened.

A top general of a foreign nation was attacked and killed which is an act of war according to international laws.

There will be most likely be many Americans and Iranians to die just to protect Trump's fat ass!

Does Trump have any moral character? Time and again, Trump shows us that no he doesn't. It is all about Our Dear Leader Donald the First.

How many people have already gone to prison to protect Trump? How many more of Trump's pawns will fall on their own swords to keep Trump out of prison?

Trump has no loyalty to the US Constitution he has taken an oath to protect. The only law Trump knows is whatever Trump wants in any given moment in time.

We are now living in the Age of the Rule by the Whims of Emperor Donald I. Not Rule of Law!

It would not surprise me if Trump is already laying the plans for Don Jr to take his place. Emperor Donald II. Like Assad in Syria or the Kim family in North Korea.

George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln. Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, Jr would all be horrified to see how Trump has distorted democracy and the US Constitution beyond any recognition at all.

It is tragic to see a once great nation take such a nose dive in such a short time.

All it takes is trading the rule of law to the rule of some tyrant.

The tragedy for me is that I am not writing about a despot Russia or China. I am writing about my own nation, the United States of America.

Trump and the Republican Party must be voted out of office in 2020. The consequences of not doing so could see the end of the United States as a democratic republic.
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,948
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
We can discuss the pros and cons of taking out this general until the cows come home.

My biggest concern is on what basis was this action taken and for what purpose.

Is this action a result of the rule of law or was this action taken as a rule of Trump?

And for what purpose? To further the political agenda of Trump or to further American interests in the world?

All actions by the US government should follow the rule of law with the law being based on the US Constitution.

All foreign actions by our government should be done to further American interests or further democracy and the rule of law.

We should never ask people to die so we can further the political career of a person or group of people.

Congress has sole power to declare war. That has been enshrined in the US Constitution from the beginning.

Had American troops been attacked, of course, those troops should do what is absolutely necessary to protect the forces that are being attacked on the ground and in that region.

What Trump has done is considered by the international world as an act of war. This was a top Iranian general that we used a drone to kill him. Not some tribal chief out in some desert somewhere.

Suppose for a moment, that the the Iranians made a direct attack on the US killing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We would consider that an act of war.

The proper response for Trump if Iran attacked American forces would have been for Trump to get authority from Congress to take out Iran military. This can be obtained within hours if necessary.

Without that authority, an attempt to round up any persons here in the US responsible for the attack on the US is about all that Trump could do, that is, if Trump is being the chief executive officer of the US under the rule of law, not the US under the rule of Trump.

It has been a week and Congress hasn't been informed of what was done, why, and what the alternatives would have been if this apparent act of war was not carried out.

Once again, Trump is following the dictates of Trump without any pretense of following constitutional law.

Once Congress and the people are notified to all the circumstances (without endangering any Americans) and if Trump asks Congress and Congress approves then we will be under the rule of law and Trump have the authority to began an offensive against Iran or other rogue nation.

There has not been any indication that there was any immediate danger by the US choosing to not carry out an act of war against Iran by the US assassinating the top general of another nation.

WWI was a horrible war resulting in the deaths of millions of people. The major nations of the world stumbled into WWI as a result of an assassination.

At the time, no one suspected that the world was headed for a world war.

Perhaps, this general needed to be taken out. This should have been directed from the entire military with authority from Congress.

Without information coming from Our Dear Leader Donald the First, we are left to our own suspicions why.

Consider: Abrumpty, Trump turned against the Kurds and gave to Russia a large part of Syria. What else was going on at the time? Trump was being impeached by the House. That is what was going on. Trump made this decision all by himself without reviewing it with his military experts.

Why? To create a diversion from the impeachment by the House.

Is there anything happening now that is similar to the Syria disaster? As a matter of fact there is. The trial of Trump is about to start in the Senate. Would Trump start a war to detract the Congress and the American people away from that trial?

The tragic news is that, yes, that is exactly what I think happened.

A top general of a foreign nation was attacked and killed which is an act of war according to international laws.

There will be most likely be many Americans and Iranians to die just to protect Trump's fat ass!

Does Trump have any moral character? Time and again, Trump shows us that no he doesn't. It is all about Our Dear Leader Donald the First.

How many people have already gone to prison to protect Trump? How many more of Trump's pawns will fall on their own swords to keep Trump out of prison?

Trump has no loyalty to the US Constitution he has taken an oath to protect. The only law Trump knows is whatever Trump wants in any given moment in time.

We are now living in the Age of the Rule by the Whims of Emperor Donald I. Not Rule of Law!

It would not surprise me if Trump is already laying the plans for Don Jr to take his place. Emperor Donald II. Like Assad in Syria or the Kim family in North Korea.

George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln. Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, Jr would all be horrified to see how Trump has distorted democracy and the US Constitution beyond any recognition at all.

It is tragic to see a once great nation take such a nose dive in such a short time.

All it takes is trading the rule of law to the rule of some tyrant.

The tragedy for me is that I am not writing about a despot Russia or China. I am writing about my own nation, the United States of America.

Trump and the Republican Party must be voted out of office in 2020. The consequences of not doing so could see the end of the United States as a democratic republic.

Rule of law applies to Trump? That ship sailed a long time ago. Rule of law, Trump - crazy talk.
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
The pro-life Republicans love war and well here it is.

The crisis the world feared when President Donald Trump was elected president is upon us.

The price of Trumpian chaos

This is what we feared, what we warned about. An erratic, petulant, clueless president, manifestly unfit to serve as commander in chief, has sparked a high-stakes international crisis. Welcome to Donald Trump’s war.

Welcome to Trump’s war
 

Shofixti

LPSG Legend
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Posts
4,764
Media
56
Likes
150,273
Points
868
Location
Auckland (New Zealand)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Was there ever a person anywhere on Earth, in any country, race or religion who ever bought for ONE SECOND that the assassination was part of a coherent plan to de-escalate conflict rather than to inflame it?

Trump and Pompeo tried to sell it like that... but fuck, sure didn't take long to be proven wrong.
 

sudcalifornio

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Posts
1,111
Media
8
Likes
1,337
Points
443
Location
Riverbank (California, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So apparently murdering the commander in chief is a good peace policy.

Interesting precedent for the US Commander in Chief to set.
Was there ever a person anywhere on Earth, in any country, race or religion who ever bought for ONE SECOND that the assassination was part of a coherent plan to de-escalate conflict rather than to inflame it?

Trump and Pompeo tried to sell it like that... but fuck, sure didn't take long to be proven wrong.
More than anything I would like to hear trumptards defending his president actions
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
Fucking hilarious is someone really expecting a "strategy" from THIS PRESIDENT? He had a big gun and he just wanted to shoot it. That's about it. And that's how we got into a war.


Conflicting statements, crossed signals and mixed messages have left the president and his top officials scrambling to explain his mission and goals after the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani.

====

WASHINGTON — If even the Pentagon does not know whether it is coming or going in Iraq, it might be hard to blame the rest of the world for being a little confused about President Trump’s strategy for the Middle East.

As Iranian missiles fell on American bases on Tuesday in retaliation for the drone strike last week that killed Iran’s most powerful general, the administration scrambled to explain its mission and goals in the region amid a chaotic brew of conflicting statements, crossed signals and mixed messages.

The president who promised to bring troops home from the Middle East is now dispatching more instead. The Pentagon sent a letter saying it was withdrawing from Iraq, only to disavow it as a mistake. The State Department talked about “de-escalation” while Mr. Trump beat the war drums describing all the ways he would devastate Iran if it harmed more Americans. And even then, the president was forced to back off his threat to target Iranian cultural sites after his own defense secretary publicly said doing that was a war crime.

A Strategy for the Mideast That Has Even Trump’s Allies Scratching Their Heads
 

Thikn2velvet1

Admired Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
2,715
Media
0
Likes
750
Points
148
Wrong. Bin Laden was located, Obama was briefed. He was given options, and he made the right call. This looking tough part is in your imagination. He had a job to do and he did it. Trump was given many options also and he took the most severe because he's a knucklehead. Most likely against his military advisors. Bin Laden was not a leading member of any government. This guy was. There's a way to cut out cancer without burning the entire body. Trump burned the body.

Killing a civilian, in front of his wife and kids no less, is ok, but killing a military general who was in a foreign country that his country is trying to de-stabilize and who committed terrorist acts is not? That is an awkward position for sure.

My position has always been we have no strategic interests in the Middle East, we do not need its oil, so lets get out now. The liberals on this board are a confused bunch, inasmuch as you all wanted the US to keep a military presence in the Middle East( Syria ring a bell) but I guess to not actually do anything, just be sitting ducks.

If people shoot at you, you shoot back. If you aren’t going to shoot back, why are you there? This is a true case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, textbook definition. Obama kills a bad guy in front of his wife and kids, good. Trump kills a bad guy trying to overthrow another country in that same country, bad?

I said we should not be there before, many many times, and damn was I right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hatched69

Thikn2velvet1

Admired Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
2,715
Media
0
Likes
750
Points
148
More than anything I would like to hear trumptards defending his president actions

We should not be in the Middle East, it serves no strategic interest but if you are going to be there, you can’t let people shoot at you without regard. Every dumb liberal on this forum wants us in the Middle East, re read the Syria thread, but now that you dummies want us there you want our hands tied. That is plain fucking stupid.
 

sudcalifornio

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Posts
1,111
Media
8
Likes
1,337
Points
443
Location
Riverbank (California, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Killing a civilian, in front of his wife and kids no less, is ok, but killing a military general who was in a foreign country that his country is trying to de-stabilize and who committed terrorist acts is not? That is an awkward position for sure.

My position has always been we have no strategic interests in the Middle East, we do not need its oil, so lets get out now. The liberals on this board are a confused bunch, inasmuch as you all wanted the US to keep a military presence in the Middle East( Syria ring a bell) but I guess to not actually do anything, just be sitting ducks.

If people shoot at you, you shoot back. If you aren’t going to shoot back, why are you there? This is a true case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, textbook definition. Obama kills a bad guy in front of his wife and kids, good. Trump kills a bad guy trying to overthrow another country in that same country, bad?

I said we should not be there before, many many times, and damn was I right.
We should not be in the Middle East, it serves no strategic interest but if you are going to be there, you can’t let people shoot at you without regard. Every dumb liberal on this forum wants us in the Middle East, re read the Syria thread, but now that you dummies want us there you want our hands tied. That is plain fucking stupid.
Yes hands off middle east
hands off Venezuela
Hand off Cuba
Hands off Bolivia

Hands off everywhere!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Negonoia

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,948
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
We should not be in the Middle East, it serves no strategic interest but if you are going to be there, you can’t let people shoot at you without regard. Every dumb liberal on this forum wants us in the Middle East, re read the Syria thread, but now that you dummies want us there you want our hands tied. That is plain fucking stupid.

The 'dumb liberal' that engulfed us in the middle east was George W. Bush. We support repressive regimes in the region and that will always drag is into being involved there. The only 'stupid' here is your manic assumptions. It's never a good look for you.
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
The 'dumb liberal' that engulfed us in the middle east was George W. Bush. We support repressive regimes in the region and that will always drag is into being involved there. The only 'stupid' here is your manic assumptions. It's never a good look for you.

The "personal responsibility" crowd don't like to admit to owning the disaster GWB. And if the planet survives Trump they will disown his disasters too and flush him down the memory hole. And one thing for sure they won't learn a thing. Ready to repeat the same disasters over and over and over again.

How about a little history lesson of the last republican president:


Bush’s Reign of Error: A Timeline
“You never know what your history is going to be like until long after you’re gone.” —W.

 

pp_ryder

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Posts
990
Media
2
Likes
3,463
Points
313
Location
United States
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
No, the reason why we have an unfit President in the White House is because of all the knowledgable, mentally sound people running for the Republican nomination the Republican Party chose a simpleton.
These were the same people who brought you... Drum roll, please... SARAH PALIN!