Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[cubby]

So it's also acceptable now for the Iranians to assassinate Trump? As the person who ordered the attack against one of their key government figures? Imagine the shit show if that actually happened...

Are you trying to imply Iran wouldn't assassinate the United States President if they could? I'd like to call your attention the most highly trained professional body guards in the history of the world - the United States Secret Service.

However, I can't leave it there, because that would be dodging your point. And your point also brings up a larger issue: escalation. Where does the "you killed my guy so I can kill your guy" stop?

In theory it would be acceptable. Practically, of course, that won't and can't happen. Regarding escalation, however, you could draw a line (make a "rule") that the attack and the retaliation are it - nothing more is allowed. In other words, a one for one policy. I know practically speaking of course that will never work.

[starlord]

You really think that's how it works ?

Let me tell you it is not. When Isis started to fall we had operation "god's hand" which was to take out as many former isis members when isis started to crumble before the could reach Europe.
That mean drones or just boots on the ground finding the people you're looking for but in bad company hence having to use arms first.

It's one thing being naive another to being utterly uneducated.

What do you think a lot of special forces do on the ground ?

what does isis have to do with assassinating members of a government we are not officially at war with?

- - - Updated - - -

Are you trying to imply Iran wouldn't assassinate the United States President if they could? I'd like to call your attention the most highly trained professional body guards in the history of the world - the United States Secret Service.

However, I can't leave it there, because that would be dodging your point. And your point also brings up a larger issue: escalation. Where does the "you killed my guy so I can kill your guy" stop?

In theory it would be acceptable. Practically, of course, that won't and can't happen. Regarding escalation, however, you could draw a line (make a "rule") that the attack and the retaliation are it - nothing more is allowed. In other words, a one for one policy. I know practically speaking of course that will never work.

that's why the past 2 presidents considered such an act extremely irresponsible and not worth it.

[cubby]

that's why the past 2 presidents considered such an act extremely irresponsible and not worth it.

And I disagree with their assessment. We cannot allow countries to attack us without repercussions.

Moreover, what's the different between sinking a boat or attacking a training camp? Why are those ok but killing the person who is actually responsible for the attack isn't?

[Paranoid Android]

Rep. Duncan Hunter submits his resignation letter one month after pleading guilty in a corruption case. The California Republican says he will leave office on Jan. 13.

One of the worst of the GOP is gone. Likely clears the way for Issa or whoever runs on the GOP ticket for that district.

[starlord]

And I disagree with their assessment. We cannot allow countries to attack us without repercussions.

Moreover, what's the different between sinking a boat or attacking a training camp? Why are those ok but killing the person who is actually responsible for the attack isn't?

because, as was already established by yourself, it leads to greater escalation.
which is already playing out. idk if you noticed but it hasn't stopped them from attacking us and only motivated them further. so the very reasoning you give for it being a good idea doesn't hold water.

[cubby]

because, as was already established by yourself, it leads to greater escalation.

Not necessarily. I merely suggested it's possible. Just as I've said, more than once, that it could give other leaders pause before ordering attacks. Why didn't you mention I said that as well?

which is already playing out.

It is? Iran attacked us again? Please link us that news - we must have missed it.

idk if you noticed but it hasn't stopped them from attacking us and only motivated them further. so the very reasoning you give for it being a good idea doesn't hold water.

Again, please link the recent Iranian attacks after the General's assassination. We'll wait.

Motivated them further? You have links for their thought processes now? How do you know they aren't sitting in their offices seriously questioning their next attack plans because it could be them on the target list?

I'm a little tired of you just making shit up to prove a point that isn't being made well to begin with. And you're answering any of my questions. Could you try that out, please:

Moreover, what's the different between sinking a boat or attacking a training camp? Why are those ok but killing the person who is actually responsible for the attack isn't?

[jonnysensible]

Not necessarily. I merely suggested it's possible. Just as I've said, more than once, that it could give other leaders pause before ordering attacks. Why didn't you mention I said that as well?




It is? Iran attacked us again? Please link us that news - we must have missed it.




Again, please link the recent Iranian attacks after the General's assassination. We'll wait.

Motivated them further? You have links for their thought processes now? How do you know they aren't sitting in their offices seriously questioning their next attack plans because it could be them on the target list?

I'm a little tired of you just making shit up to prove a point that isn't being made well to begin with. And you're answering any of my questions. Could you try that out, please:

Moreover, what's the different between sinking a boat or attacking a training camp? Why are those ok but killing the person who is actually responsible for the attack isn't?

might want to check the news

Iranian Fars News Agency reports that an Iranian ballistic missile was fired at Al Asad Airbase.

There has been multiple rocket/mortar attacks on several sites in Iraq on US installations including Al-Asad base, Taji and other site though. Seems more like militias just firing whatever they have on thier hands.

From senior US military source in Iraq:
“Under missile attack from Iran. These are either cruise missiles or short range ballistic missiles. All over the country.”

Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps confirms hitting US Ain Al Assad Airbase in #Iraq with tens of missiles.

[Trifle]

Are you trying to imply Iran wouldn't assassinate the United States President if they could? I'd like to call your attention the most highly trained professional body guards in the history of the world - the United States Secret Service.

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't, because the obvious consequence would be immediate war. I also agree that it's not really practical or likely, it was purely a hypothetical.

In theory it would be acceptable. Practically, of course, that won't and can't happen. Regarding escalation, however, you could draw a line (make a "rule") that the attack and the retaliation are it - nothing more is allowed. In other words, a one for one policy. I know practically speaking of course that will never work.

I think there would be a lot of arguments about what the "one for one" actually is. Like (again hypothetically) if Iran claimed the embassy attack was in retaliation to something else and thus immune from retribution.

Also targeted assassinations as retributive actions appear to be illegal, both under international and US law, so there's that. Which is why the current story is that his killing was to prevent future "imminent" attacks (which is theoretically legal). But there's no details on what those attacks are or if they really exist at all, so who knows? The official position hasn't been very consistent on this subject.

[starlord]

Not necessarily. I merely suggested it's possible. Just as I've said, more than once, that it could give other leaders pause before ordering attacks. Why didn't you mention I said that as well?

It is? Iran attacked us again? Please link us that news - we must have missed it.

Again, please link the recent Iranian attacks after the General's assassination. We'll wait.

Motivated them further? You have links for their thought processes now?

I'm a little tired of you just making shit up to prove a point that isn't being made well to begin with. And you're answering any of my questions. Could you try that out, please:

Moreover, what's the different between sinking a boat or attacking a training camp? Why are those ok but killing the person who is actually responsible for the attack isn't?

i answered your question, you just didn't like it.

so lets be very clear then: it was iranian backed militias in iraq who staged the embassy protest.
rockets were fired at the embassy instead of protestors tearing shit up. that is an escalation.

those iranian backed militias are still out there, still attacking as well as now the iranian military itself threatening us. thats another escalation.
they have not backed down. who was "given pause"?

Explosions have been reported near multiple American embassies and camps in Iraq in the first sign of a retaliation against a US airstrike which killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

Two rockets were fired near the location of the US Embassy in Baghdad.

Balad Airbase, north of the city, has also been targeted by another three rockets, according to Sky News Arabia.

The base is currently home to an unknown number of American Troops.

According to international news agency Reuters, two of the Katyusha rockets landed within the perimeters of the base.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.lbc...bassy-as-iran/

one of our bases was just hit with another rocket attack.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...-tv/ar-BBYIsuZ

what am i making up?

[Edge-]

Again, please link the recent Iranian attacks after the General's assassination. We'll wait.

https://abcnews.go.com/International...ry?id=68130625

A U.S. official confirms to ABC News that ballistic missiles have been fired from inside Iran at multiple U.S. military facilities inside Iraq on Wednesday morning local time. The facilities include Erbil in northern Iraq and Al Asad Air Base in western Iraq, the official said.

I wouldn't be so quick to be so smug and self-assured.

[Graden]

Interesting how the Greek prime minister's visit to the White House today went almost entirely unnoticed. In addition, Trump even called Erdogan a friend in front of him and there was no joint press conference after the talks.

I don't know what Kyriakos Mitsotakis wanted to achieve exactly but to me it seems all he got is a huge Trumpish slap in the face.

[alexw]

Not necessarily. I merely suggested it's possible. Just as I've said, more than once, that it could give other leaders pause before ordering attacks. Why didn't you mention I said that as well?




It is? Iran attacked us again? Please link us that news - we must have missed it.




Again, please link the recent Iranian attacks after the General's assassination. We'll wait.

Motivated them further? You have links for their thought processes now? How do you know they aren't sitting in their offices seriously questioning their next attack plans because it could be them on the target list?

I'm a little tired of you just making shit up to prove a point that isn't being made well to begin with. And you're answering any of my questions. Could you try that out, please:

Moreover, what's the different between sinking a boat or attacking a training camp? Why are those ok but killing the person who is actually responsible for the attack isn't?

Well this post has aged well. Really well.

Its war now. The imbecile has actually started a war.

Un-fucking-believable.

[Dontrike]

On the upside, I've found the Trump Presidency to be very entertaining, which I guess is what happens when an entertainer gets elected President.

Trump's presidency isn't even good-bad, like certain movies are (The Room, Bridemic, etc), it's just terrible.

[Stormspark]

Well this post has aged well. Really well.

Its war now. The imbecile has actually started a war.

Un-fucking-believable.

All he needs to do is find some yes-man that's willing to sign off on it to launch nukes too.

[Shadowferal]

All he needs to do is find some yes-man that's willing to sign off on it to launch nukes too.

Not going to happen...(Military...General said no..even to the point of disobeying a direct order)

[Stormspark]

Not going to happen...(Military...General said no..even to the point of disobeying a direct order)

For now, unless he just starts replacing people until he gets someone that says yes (and the republicans won't do anything about it).

[mvaliz]

All he needs to do is find some yes-man that's willing to sign off on it to launch nukes too.

When it comes to Nukes, for the first time I'm actually hoping the aweful selfish GOP selifish-interest that has taken hold of the majority of the party and led us to this mess kicks their brains into realizing that if Nukes get signed - they're signing their own death warrants of themselves, their loved ones and families.

[szechuan]

Donald Trump starts a war and Republicans don't care.

[Adam Jensen]

Al-Asad airbase was just attacked by Iran. I'm sure Donald Trump will maintain a cool head and find a way to de-escalate the situation before it gets worse.

[mvaliz]

Donald Trump starts a war and Republicans don't care.

Well, thank god we didn't get that Warhawk Clinton in there! >_<

Feking Christ... >_<

- - - Updated - - -

Al-Asad airbase was just attacked by Iran. I'm sure Donald Trump will maintain a cool head and find a way to de-escalate the situation before it gets worse.

I'm trying to decide what's worse... the fact you left out the /s... or we're actually at a point where we don't need a "/s" anymore. =/