Deceased US Navy Seal's Father Refuses to meet Trump

[Cûr]

Trump was so keen on having his own "Bin Laden" moment that he rushed and botched things.

Says someone with absolutely NO IDEA how military missions are planned and executed. You speak as if you know Trump had first hand knowledge of this operation / hand in planning it.

That's just not how it works. He was given a recommendation from a senior military staffer, who got their recommendation from the command of the people running the op, who got their information from assets in place. Add in a few more planners, the actual combat troops, and several more chains of command, all of whom gave their go ahead for this mission to take place.

But yeah, you go ahead and blame Trump, because that fits your agenda. Go you.

<eyeroll.gif>

[Dextroden]

What deflection? Did I bring up sandy hook in a thread that has nothing to do with it? You think Obama's use of parents who supported his policy, is the same as Trump taking credit for a successful mission that resulted in an American death? If you think I'm deflecting, feel free to explain what showing those who support gun control, due to the death of their children... is the same as Trump calling a mission successful, to a grieving father whose son died in a mission resulting from Trump's signature.

- - - Updated - - -



Why were you scared of Trump as POTUS?

Clearly your problem is people being used as political props and not just because Trump is taking his turn at the wheel doing what other presidents have done.

[Felya]

You totally miss the point. Soldies die under the POTUS orders. Most are not made public and definitely not political. Also, all of Seal Team 6 that took out Bin Laden were killed after Obama honored them and showed them on TV. But still, my point is that soldiers die under the POTUS order. The decision to keep the Afgan war going was Obamas were more than 2500 troops died.

Yes, I'm not talking about Trump continuing the "Afgan" war. Soldiers deaths are always scrutinized, when the POTUS claims success. There are many soldiers that die, but few presidents that claim succes in missions they die in.

Why were you scared of Trump as POTUS?

[Xirrohon]

And the smart thing for Trump to do is not give in to that and try to counter it with the wife. How are you missing that? The father has no damn political power he said what he feels and you telling him he should be doing and feeling is ridiculous.

Trump handled it how he wants. He didnt make it political. The father said, I didnt vote for Trump, I dont like him and I wont be meeting with him. He didnt have to say anything to the press but he did. I dont care how he feels. Im only saying that he made it political, which he did. What happens after is a direct result of what he did.

[Felya]

Clearly your problem is people being used as political props and not just because Trump is taking his turn at the wheel doing what other presidents have done.

What? The thread is about a father who refused to meet with Trump. What turn at the wheel? Even in your example, the people Obama had on that stage, started their own campaign to bring gun control. They needed the spotlight for their cause, not just Obama's. It wasn't about Obama taking credit for anything...

[Xirrohon]

Yes, I'm not talking about Trump continuing the "Afgan" war. Soldiers deaths are always scrutinized, when the POTUS claims success. There are many soldiers that die, but few presidents that claim succes in missions they die in.

Why were you scared of Trump as POTUS?

I dont get it? It cant be a success even with deaths? Its war, deaths happen during successful missions.

I didnt like Trumps lack of Foreign Policy. His thoughts on EPA are ridiculous.

[Dug]

Trump handled it how he wants. He didnt make it political. The father said, I didnt vote for Trump, I dont like him and I wont be meeting with him. He didnt have to say anything to the press but he did. I dont care how he feels. Im only saying that he made it political, which he did. What happens after is a direct result of what he did.

We are not children "he did it first!" is not a valid argument. Trump did not need to continue to push this issue and make his own political statement by parading around the widow. As Commander in Chief he should take responsibility, apologize, reassure the father that the investigation is underway and they'll try to have answers for him soon. It doesn't matter what the father says, as the POTUS you don't belittle the family members of soldiers under your command for being angry and hurt.

I'm seriously dumbfounded how you cannot see how Trump doesn't need to do these things. He doesn't need to do them.

[Halicia]

Love how everyone here is blaming Trump. Trump is very clearly quite horrified. He fired several people over it and went to the funeral and spoke about it and tried to get in touch with the family to apologize. Oh yeah, such a bad man.

He crashed the guy's funeral ? Yeah, thats about as low as you can get after you kill someone.

I 100% agree with you that only a bad man would go to a funeral where he wasn't wanted.

[Dextroden]

What? The thread is about a father who refused to meet with Trump. What turn at the wheel? Even in your example, the people Obama had on that stage, started their own campaign to bring gun control. They needed the spotlight for their cause, not just Obama's. It wasn't about Obama taking credit for anything...

Nope. Obama totally wasn't given the credit for "fighting school shootings". And looks like it is because it was Trump did this.

[Pterodactylus]

"[The Generals] lost Ryan" - President Trump, passing the buck.

- - - Updated - - -

This wasn't said in the article so lets leave speculation out of it. It did say "valuable intelligence" was gathered so it was a mission we got something from. Not to be sore or cold hearted but lets face it, when you "voluntarily" join the Seals, you are signing up for missions with a high degree of danger and risk. Sure, they plan and calculate the best odds, but that doesn't mean it still isn't far more risky then any other type.

Its a horrible thing to lose a soldier, they have my greatest respect, however they did sign up to do a job and this has to be something that you are prepared too have happen. RIP.

If it was Commander in Chief HRC, we'd be in week two of the first of many congressional investigations.

[Dextroden]

"[The Generals] lost Ryan" - President Trump, passing the buck.

- - - Updated - - -



If it was Commander in Chief HRC, we'd be in week two of the first of many congressional investigations.

We would. And it would be just as stupid as blaming Trump here.

[Independent voter]

The US Navy Seal's wife got like 4 minutes of applause in the Senate.

[Daelak]

President uses parents of the dead to give their agenda legitimacy.

So different. Much politics. Wow.

No, it was to show the US, since at the time polls showed that there was a huge swelling of public interest to reform, and the parents were the face of the reform. Compare that to Trump bringing a 2 week old widow to make Americans think in an irrational manner to support a ground war in the ME.

- - - Updated - - -

Because it became political after the father made it so. I dont understand how youre missing this.

There was nothing political about his statement. He didn't want to meet Trump, and thought that there should be an investigation. Trump made it political by using her as a means to get an emotional rise out of Americans to support a ground war in the ME.

[Kaleredar]

Says someone with absolutely NO IDEA how military missions are planned and executed. You speak as if you know Trump had first hand knowledge of this operation / hand in planning it.

That's just not how it works. He was given a recommendation from a senior military staffer, who got their recommendation from the command of the people running the op, who got their information from assets in place. Add in a few more planners, the actual combat troops, and several more chains of command, all of whom gave their go ahead for this mission to take place.

But yeah, you go ahead and blame Trump, because that fits your agenda. Go you.

<eyeroll.gif>

He had six days at the maximum to plan this and made a decision over dinner. That's the information we know.

The only people calling the operation "a success" is... you guessed it, Trump.

So let's currently weight the evidence:

"The raid was a failure" Source, John McCain, politician with ACTUAL military service and experience

"The decision was made over dinner. The raid should have been conducted after rigorous debate" - Source, U.S service officials

That, against what amounts to "The raid was a great show of Trump's leadership skills and the greatest of successes" - Source, Trump.

I'm sensing some bias. And it's in believing the guy who's saying he's his own proof.

How the fuck do you know? Lol. JFC, people on here act like they have inside information to the intel, or how the decision was made. The fact is, the time to act was when Trump was approached with it. You think Obama would have said no? GTFO.

Everything I said was a fact.

Trump was in the white house for six days when the plan went down. Fact. He ordered the operation's go-ahead over dinner. Fact.

Does that sound like a well thought-out and planned go-ahead of events? Because US officials and military personnel seem to think otherwise.

Also, look at last nights speech. The wife attended, sat right next to Ivanka. This all the Fathers politicizing of his sons death and its shameful and embarrassing.

You're telling the father what he should and shouldn't do with the death of his son?

[Stacyrect]

Again, the above only confirms your bias, not the peeking into an alternative reality, where Obama would have signed off... regardless of what changed in those weeks... the above does not say what you claim, just what your misinformation is based on. The article isn't lying to you, because you come to conclusions it doesn't.



No, thank you for sharing what you consider as the reason for your conclusion. A better link would be a Cable comic and saying you are Nathan Summers...



Show me in the link where it shows that Obama had no choice, but to sign the order, just like Trump. Show me a single piece of evidence, that if not in the same position, there would be no way that Obama would say... "too risky, let's wait until the next one"... until you can prove that it's impossible... you can continue making shit up, while beating your chest... >.<



I'm presenting you with reality... I don't have evidence of an alternative reality, where Obama signs the same thing Trump did. I'm not the one making such a claim... all I have to do, to show you I'm right, is that Trump signed it and Obama didn't... the onus is on you to prove Obama had no choice, but to sign it. You have yet to do so... all you have presented is that this was a moonless might, not that another wouldn't occur within a month nor that Obama was forced to sign it. Until you do, your assertion that he would have signed it, is equally credible to me saying he wouldn't.

You stating an unknown to convince your self to defend Trump from fault, isn't my problem. I cannot prove to you that Obama wouldn't sign it, because unlike you... I cannot see into alternative reality... you have powers, Nathan Summers, that us mortals do not possess...



You have got to be kidding me... I link you an article discussing how one of the family's was not happy with their meeting with Clinton and you reply it never happened? I guess Trump was lying when he invited her to the 3rd debate:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ential-debate/

Oh... is Breitbart too liberal for you? So sad...



Nope, making shit up. The link you posted said nothing about Obama having no choice, but to sign the order for that night. You are only pointing that a moonless night happened and one was the reason to not have the raid last time. What you have yet to present, is evidence that Obama couldn't have reviewed the same thing as Trump did, and wouldn't say... next month... too many kids... nothing...



No, I'm saying your interpretation doesn't exist. It cannot be fake, when it's not there.



Trump did... which is why he claimed the resignation was due to lying... that damn Trump contradicted you! How dare he!



Uhm... you are now not saying that Obama would have signed it as Trump did? You are saying this has nothing to do with Obama, because you have no clue what he would have done? That this is all Trump's fault for signing it? Twist!!!

Try reading your own replies amigo...



Bullshit... your linking that their communication was caught with Russia, contradicts that they were monitoring anyone, but Russia. Do you read your own links or assume I won't? WTF? This is hilarious... >.<

- - - Updated - - -



No, the fact that it's always news when it happens isn't sheepology. But, damn... its funny how calling people sheep, now resembles the very thing it's meant to represent, more than just about anything else. Crack thesaurus once in a while... or is that too conformist?

- - - Updated - - -



Which is exactly what I am trying to convince him off. He keeps acting like this would have been the only such night ever or that there was nothing Trump could do, but sign it... as Obama would have inevitably...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/w...questions.html

"President Barack Obama’s national security aides had reviewed the plans" "Mr. Obama did not act because the Pentagon wanted to launch the attack on a moonless night"

There is no bias, that is what the article claims. Do you have some information that suggests otherwise? Otherwise you are just wasting everyone's time with your worthless conjecture.

I did share the reasons for my conclusions, that wasn't it though. Yet another demonstration of your lack of knowledge and willingness to use this argument as a vehicle for your childish ad hominem.

Don't need to, showed you a link where he was perfectly willing. You are literally ranting like a lunatic about alternative time lines and reality and other useless shit no one but urself is talking about.

Obama admin was perfectly willing, it was reviewed by his advisers, brought forth to the guy, who didn't act based on recommendations from the pentagon. Once again, do you have evidence that suggests otherwise? Whether he would or would not is an argument you have been having with yourself.

I asked you to link me proof she offered her condolences to the victims of benghazi. Once again, the article you linked provides no proof she offered her condolences to the victims. Only that clinton lied, which we already know. If you can't provide proof, admit your wrong and move on.

Once again, you spectacularly make an ass out of yourself by claiming no review was done, when had you actually read the link, you would know their was. Perhaps it's time you find an adult to help you.

Trump thought Flynn was just doing his job. Once again, wrong

I didn't make any claims as to anyone signing anything. I stated, in lines with article provided, that the raid would have happened under the obama admin. Please remove your head from the rabbit hole.

The officials said the intercepted communications were not limited to Trump campaign officials, and included other associates of Mr. Trump
Yes they were spying on private citizens. You have proven repeatedly you haven't read any of the links.

If you have something of value to contribute, please do so. If you are going to continue with what has been incoherent arguments which you have manufactured to have with yourself, I'm not gonna bother responding. I will just sit back, point, and laugh.

[belleflop]

The buck always stops with the president when it comes to the military. The decision was his to carry out the mission and he is responsible for the outcome. For him to deflect blame demonstrates his inability to be a true leader. High ranking military officials have to be fuming pissed how he is handling this situation.

[-Cynical-]

I've never seen so many ill informed people who think they actually know what's going on.

[Spriggs]

Didn't happen to see this posted yet.

[Poopymonster]

Haha exactly. He is a narcissist, who probably still high off his inauguration speech, ignored the cons of a direct strike approach told unanimously by his joint chiefs, who probably preferred a longer period of surveillance and a longer time to prepare the rebel forces.

Because we are winners. Losers get themselves captured or killed.

[Ishayu]

He crashed the guy's funeral ? Yeah, thats about as low as you can get after you kill someone.

I 100% agree with you that only a bad man would go to a funeral where he wasn't wanted.

1) Trump didn't kill the guy. It's war, losses happen, and furthermore Trump was not being informed correctly by intelligence and fired people over that negligence.
2) Trump left upon finding out he wasn't wanted. He arrived, tried to apologize, and left when he was told he wasn't wanted.
3) He didn't crash the funeral at all.