1. #28081
    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    While i agree it was not complacency, desperation is equally wrong. The Nazis rose to power because stupid politicians thought the could contain the Nazis for their personal power gain. It was a huge miscalculation by (establishment) politicians - "in one month we will have Hitler in a corner, squealing like a piglet"
    The nazis having power was the result of a political crisis. It was impossible to form a government because all attempts to do so were opposed by the KDP and Nazis. The alliance with Hitler was an attempt to break the stalemate and form a government that could you know DO something in a critical time, with the great depression happening at this time.

    Thekri is right. Weird people say complacency led to the rise of Hitler, it was hardliners from the left and the right that killed democracy.
    Your problem is that you’re more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

  2. #28082
    The Lightbringer Zaydin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    FL, USA
    Posts
    3,010
    The Air Force is apparently ordering an investigation of the stays/spending at Trumps golf resort in Scotland. How soon do you think Trump will start calling it a witch hunt and demand it be shut down?
    "If you are ever asking yourself 'Is Trump lying or is he stupid?', the answer is most likely C: All of the Above" - Seth Meyers


  3. #28083
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaydin View Post
    The Air Force is apparently ordering an investigation of the stays/spending at Trumps golf resort in Scotland. How soon do you think Trump will start calling it a witch hunt and demand it be shut down?
    Less than two days.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  4. #28084
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaydin View Post
    How soon do you think Trump will start calling it a witch hunt and demand it be shut down?
    He won't. He won't need to. Remember, Pence has already used "We asked the State Department, and they said it was okay." The odds of the military directly contradicting their commanding officer is low enough in a vacuum. The Air Force will almost assuredly do the same.

  5. #28085
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Agreed.

    The Democrats are accused of basically having a rigged race, and I can't exactly dispute that. But the Republicans are just canceling the race to hand Trump a gold medal and fireworks that spell #WINNING. Which is worse? Don't know. But you can't complain about one and endorse the other. Which Trump did in tweets as recently as last week.
    Again nothing was "rigged", even taking into account the super delegates, which colluded against Bernie, he still never had enough votes. Even if all the supers voted for him, he would not have won. The fact is, not enough people voted for him.

  6. #28086
    More racism from Trump.

    When the former Governor of the Great State of South Carolina,
    @MarkSanford
    , was reported missing, only to then say he was away hiking on the Appalachian Trail, then was found in Argentina with his Flaming Dancer friend, it sounded like his political career was over. It was,....
    https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonal...twgr%5Eprofile

    Flaming is a typo of flamingo(because he thinks that’s what Flamenco is called). It’s a dance from Spain, not Argentina. The “dancer friend” is actually a reporter, not a dancer.

    Chrissy Teigan also called him a pussy ass bitch after he complained she’s foul-mouthed and doesn’t give him enough credit for criminal justice reform.
    Last edited by Vegas82; 2019-09-09 at 12:46 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    100:1 odds that he wont
    Quote Originally Posted by freefolk View Post
    Okay. I'll stop sharing my views.

  7. #28087
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Canpinter View Post
    Anyone else think that if Obama hadn't killed him Trump would have invited Bin ladin to maralago at this point ?
    Actually let's get back to that topic.

    NBC News has the story that in any other day and age would not be surprising: the Vice President and National Security Advisor were against the idea of the Taliban coming to Camp David.

    And yet, it has to be phrased as "VP and NSA oppose the President". Because Trump.

    The article goes on to say that the idea of hosting the meeting conveniently happened when Pence and Bolton were, let's say, "Flaming Dancing" in Poland -- remember, Pence went instead of Trump because of the hurricane. From context, I'm guessing that someone rushed to the phone, called them, and said "Jesus Christ you guys, you need to get on the line and stop this!" because apparently, Trump was warming to the idea of hosting the Taliban near DC on the week of 9/11. And, well, a lot of people took a dim view of that. Veterans, for example. And First Responders. Which Trump claimed he was.

    While the intelligence community said the Taliban were as untrustworthy as, well, bin Laden-supporting terrorists who kill civilians for voting should be expected to be, apparently, another issue was also on the table:

    There also was concern among some U.S. officials that Ghani would not show up for such a meeting, and they argued it was better for the president to cancel first than be stood up, the officials and people familiar with the matter said.

    One concern among some administration officials was that elevating the negotiations to a meeting with the president at Camp David might later embarrass Trump if a deal fell apart, officials said.
    Think back to Trump's tenure so far. How many times has he canceled a meeting, after being told someone wasn't going to show up anyhow?

    "Well which was the argument that held the most weight?"

    The fact that such a question can even be asked is sickening. There is no reasonable situation that should ever have happened, in which a meeting between the US President and an actively violent group of terrorists who supported (did not commit) the 9/11 attacks, should exist in the first place. But beyond that, there should be no follow-up situation in which the meeting should be canceled and we have to ask "was it because of the President's image?"

    Bolton has been deeply skeptical of negotiations with the Taliban, which are being led by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s envoy on the issue, former Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. U.S. negotiators have been working under the president’s demand that a drawdown occur before November 2020 when he’s up for re-election.

    The Taliban has offered a different version of events. A senior Taliban leader told NBC News Monday that Trump appears to have cancelled the negotiations after the group refused to travel to Camp David to hold direct talks with the Afghan leadership.

    "We have informed Zalmay Khalilzad a number of times that we don’t consider Ashraf Ghani and his administration as a legitimate government and therefore we refused to hold direct talks with them,” the Taliban leader based in Qatar said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

    Declining the invitation “apparently provoked the president and he suspended peace talks in reaction,” he added.
    Now it should be noted that the untrustworthy terrorists who backed 9/11 didn't, like, have a written document or recording. But Trump does that all the time, so, back to square one. But "we didn't want to come because they invited the Afghan President" isn't a giant secret or anything. They've said that before. And the legitimate President of Afghanistan has also been on record of saying he wouldn't negotiate with terrorists, something that until recently the US would have agreed with.

    In the end, the question is not "which of the three people canceled first", which we've already seen in other arenas and the answer is almost always "Trump claims he did but lied". The question is "why was this meeting called in the first place, when two of the three people would never have called the other?" This meeting with the Taliban, on the week of 9/11, cannot be put on anyone other than Trump, and therefore, the rabid fanbase must now defend Trump negotiating with brown terrorists (we've discussed the white ones already).

  8. #28088
    Remember how Trump mishandled classified information provided by Isreal?

    Well, that incident caused the US to extract the top spy within Russia that had access to the Kremlin.


    US extracted top spy from inside Russia in 2017
    In a previously undisclosed secret mission in 2017, the United States successfully extracted from Russia one of its highest-level covert sources inside the Russian government, multiple Trump administration officials with direct knowledge told CNN.

    A person directly involved in the discussions said that the removal of the Russian was driven, in part, by concerns that President Donald Trump and his administration repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the covert source as a spy.
    The decision to carry out the extraction occurred soon after a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel.
    The disclosure to the Russians by the President, though not about the Russian spy specifically, prompted intelligence officials to renew earlier discussions about the potential risk of exposure, according to the source directly involved in the matter.

    At the time, then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo told other senior Trump administration officials that too much information was coming out regarding the covert source, known as an asset. An extraction, or "exfiltration" as such an operation is referred to by intelligence officials, is an extraordinary remedy when US intelligence believes an asset is in immediate danger.

    A US official said before the secret operation there was media speculation about the existence of such a covert source, and such coverage or public speculation poses risks to the safety of anyone a foreign government suspects may be involved. This official did not identify any public reporting to that effect at the time of this decision and CNN could not find any related reference in media reports.

    Asked for comment, Brittany Bramell, the CIA director of public affairs, told CNN: "CNN's narrative that the Central Intelligence Agency makes life-or-death decisions based on anything other than objective analysis and sound collection is simply false. Misguided speculation that the President's handling of our nation's most sensitive intelligence—which he has access to each and every day—drove an alleged exfiltration operation is inaccurate."
    A spokesperson for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declined to comment. White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said, "CNN's reporting is not only incorrect, it has the potential to put lives in danger."

    Wide concerns about Trump in intelligence community
    The removal happened at a time of wide concern in the intelligence community about mishandling of intelligence by Trump and his administration. Those concerns were described to CNN by five sources who served in the Trump administration, intelligence agencies and Congress.

    Those concerns continued to grow in the period after Trump's Oval Office meeting with Kislyak and Lavrov. Weeks after the decision to extract the spy, in July 2017, Trump met privately with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G20 summit in Hamburg and took the unusual step of confiscating the interpreter's notes. Afterward, intelligence officials again expressed concern that the President may have improperly discussed classified intelligence with Russia, according to an intelligence source with knowledge of the intelligence community's response to the Trump-Putin meeting.

    Knowledge of the Russian covert source's existence was highly restricted within the US government and intelligence agencies. According to one source, there was "no equal alternative" inside the Russian government, providing both insight and information on Putin.

    CNN is withholding several details about the spy to reduce the risk of the person's identification.
    The secret removal of the high-level Russian asset has left the US without one of its key sources on the inner workings of the Kremlin and the plans and thinking of the Russian president at a time when tensions between the two nations have been growing. The US intelligence community considers Russia one of the two greatest threats to US national security, along with China.

    "The impact would be huge because it is so hard to develop sources like that in any denied area, particularly Russia, because the surveillance and security there is so stringent," a former senior intelligence official told CNN. "You can't reacquire a capability like that overnight."

    Months of mounting fear
    The decision to pull the asset out of Russia was the culmination of months of mounting fear within the intelligence community.

    At the end of the Obama administration, US intelligence officials had already expressed concerns about the safety of this spy and other Russian assets, given the length of their cooperation with the US, according to a former senior intelligence official.

    Those concerns grew in early 2017 after the US intelligence community released its public report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election, which said Putin himself ordered the operation. The intelligence community also shared a classified version of the report with the incoming Trump administration, and it included highly protected details on the sources behind the intelligence. Senior US intelligence officials considered extracting at least one Russian asset at the time but did not do so, according to the former senior intelligence official.

    In the first months of his administration, Trump's handling of classified intelligence further concerned intelligence officials. Ultimately, they decided to launch the difficult operation to remove an asset who had been working for the US for years.

    The President was informed in advance of the extraction, along with a small number of senior officials. Details of the extraction itself remain secret and the whereabouts of the asset today are unknown to CNN.

  9. #28089
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    The President was informed in advance of the extraction, along with a small number of senior officials
    Let's give the intelligence community some credit, they didn't wait around for Trump to make the call. And it wasn't 100% Trump's fault, as the article says. Still, good to know that they were worried about a sudden case of food poisoning because Trump handed info directly to Russia and saved a valuable asset's life.

  10. #28090
    Immortal Stormspark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Columbus OH
    Posts
    7,081
    Quote Originally Posted by NihilSustinet View Post
    I would love for Mensa to administer an actual IQ test to Trump. He has been surrounded by well-paid yes men his entire life. The look on his face when they tell him what a colossal idiot he is would be priceless.. for about half a second until he calls it fake news.
    He's around 70-75.

  11. #28091
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormspark View Post
    He's around 70-75.
    No, he isn't.

  12. #28092
    The Lightbringer Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    3,978
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Actually let's get back to that topic.

    NBC News has the story that in any other day and age would not be surprising: the Vice President and National Security Advisor were against the idea of the Taliban coming to Camp David.

    And yet, it has to be phrased as "VP and NSA oppose the President". Because Trump.

    The article goes on to say that the idea of hosting the meeting conveniently happened when Pence and Bolton were, let's say, "Flaming Dancing" in Poland -- remember, Pence went instead of Trump because of the hurricane. From context, I'm guessing that someone rushed to the phone, called them, and said "Jesus Christ you guys, you need to get on the line and stop this!" because apparently, Trump was warming to the idea of hosting the Taliban near DC on the week of 9/11. And, well, a lot of people took a dim view of that. Veterans, for example. And First Responders. Which Trump claimed he was.

    While the intelligence community said the Taliban were as untrustworthy as, well, bin Laden-supporting terrorists who kill civilians for voting should be expected to be, apparently, another issue was also on the table:

    Think back to Trump's tenure so far. How many times has he canceled a meeting, after being told someone wasn't going to show up anyhow?

    "Well which was the argument that held the most weight?"

    The fact that such a question can even be asked is sickening. There is no reasonable situation that should ever have happened, in which a meeting between the US President and an actively violent group of terrorists who supported (did not commit) the 9/11 attacks, should exist in the first place. But beyond that, there should be no follow-up situation in which the meeting should be canceled and we have to ask "was it because of the President's image?"

    Now it should be noted that the untrustworthy terrorists who backed 9/11 didn't, like, have a written document or recording. But Trump does that all the time, so, back to square one. But "we didn't want to come because they invited the Afghan President" isn't a giant secret or anything. They've said that before. And the legitimate President of Afghanistan has also been on record of saying he wouldn't negotiate with terrorists, something that until recently the US would have agreed with.

    In the end, the question is not "which of the three people canceled first", which we've already seen in other arenas and the answer is almost always "Trump claims he did but lied". The question is "why was this meeting called in the first place, when two of the three people would never have called the other?" This meeting with the Taliban, on the week of 9/11, cannot be put on anyone other than Trump, and therefore, the rabid fanbase must now defend Trump negotiating with brown terrorists (we've discussed the white ones already).
    Well not trusting the Taliban is one thing Bolton and I agree on at least. I could have guessed this entire story the moment Trump tweeted he canceled it, but I didn't want to speculate, still it lines up perfectly with what we know of the situation.

    Still, it is worth noting that we are probably never going to know who canceled it first. Ghani, the Taliban, and Trump will all claim it was their decision to cancel it, as none of them want to look stood up. All three would say the exact same thing no matter what happened.

    I do highly doubt the cancelation had anything to do with the recent attack in Kabul though. The Taliban have killed 14 Americans, 2 Poles, and a Romanian since the talks have been ongoing, and only the Romanian and the last American were in this latest attack. Somehow none of the other sparked withdrawal. The Taliban have also attack over 40 schools, killing hundreds of Children, and killed thousands of other in the same time period. So I don't buy this latest attack changed anything, because it was no departure from the norm. No ceasefire had been announced, and the US hadn't stopped offensive operations either.

    Considering all three parties here will lie their ass off, and I trust none of them, the only things I think we can know with some confidence are:
    1) It wasn't due to the attack in Kabul
    2) It was almost certainly Trump's idea in the first place (The location gives it away)
    3) It is definitely dead and it not coming back. Reconciliation with the Taliban was always a pipe dream, and at least we can stop pretending now.

    So once again, just like China, just like North Korea, just like Saudi Arabia, just like new NAFTA. The great deal-maker tried something dumb, the other party laughed in his face, and he is scraping his dignity off the floor (But leaving America's dignity where it fell).

  13. #28093
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Considering all three parties here will lie their ass off
    Call me a wishful thinker, but I don't really see any point in the President of Afghanistan lying about this issue. We know they were held out of the Trump-Taliban negotiations, we know they demanded to see the info, and we know they would refuse to be part of trilateral talks. We also know they'll defend their government and until recently had the US backing to do so. For what benefit would they lie about this?

    Basically, besides the lack of motivation, I don't know the guy. And when I'm in a room with a stranger, Trump, and a 9/11 supporting terrorist who spent all last week murdering people, I know which of those three I trust the most.

  14. #28094
    Do I need to say this?

    This would be a huge scandal in any President's term.

    Oh btw...

    From Sharpiegate and Turnberry to Pence, Barr, the Taliban and the botched Afghanistan talks, Trump offered a master class this past week on how a cult of personality and financial conflicts causes good government to decay -- from the top down:

    This just happened this week which would be a horrendous week for any other President, but likely not he worst week for Trump in multiple scandals and eff ups. This is a typical week for Trump. This is where we have gone too.
    Last edited by Paranoid Android; 2019-09-09 at 03:06 PM.
    Artist formerly known as Shon237

  15. #28095
    The Lightbringer Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    3,978
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Call me a wishful thinker, but I don't really see any point in the President of Afghanistan lying about this issue. We know they were held out of the Trump-Taliban negotiations, we know they demanded to see the info, and we know they would refuse to be part of trilateral talks. We also know they'll defend their government and until recently had the US backing to do so. For what benefit would they lie about this?

    Basically, besides the lack of motivation, I don't know the guy. And when I'm in a room with a stranger, Trump, and a 9/11 supporting terrorist who spent all last week murdering people, I know which of those three I trust the most.
    Well, if you want a quick education on Ghani I can provide that, but I highly recommend not trusting any of the three in that situation. Ghani has a lot to lose from this, he has a very fragile coalition in his government, and getting yanked around by the Taliban could easily end his administration. Elections are coming up very soon, the US is increasingly unpopular due to Trump's shenanigans, and the Taliban are unpopular due to their habit of murdering the crap out of everyone. Being seen to have been in failed negotiations with either or both of them will paint him as weak, and "weak" is not a good look in a country like that.

    Oh, and he is not exactly a saint either. He has absolutely no issues with murder and corruption on a massive scale. Of the three, I would actually probably trust Trump the most, because he is a simpleton that is easy to read.

  16. #28096
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Oh, and he is not exactly a saint either.
    Alright, that's fair. But in this context, being hung out to dry by his supposed ally, there's no reason for him to be lying when he says "Not cool, bro!"

    I'll read up on the guy. Sounds like there's some history there.

  17. #28097
    The Lightbringer Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    3,978
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Alright, that's fair. But in this context, being hung out to dry by his supposed ally, there's no reason for him to be lying when he says "Not cool, bro!"

    I'll read up on the guy. Sounds like there's some history there.
    Ghani is brilliant, I have met the man twice. But honesty isn't really a valid currency over there. I am not saying he is lying for sure, I am saying that he would say the exact same thing if he was lying or not.

    In other words, any analysis of who is lying here should not take Ghani's official statement as evidence one way or another, because it simply says the most politically expedient thing. It might be true, but don't come to that conclusion just because he said it.

  18. #28098
    @Breccia @Thekri who gives a shit if they called it off first. The idea it was even going to happen is a fucking disgrace. Anything else is just more disgraceful behavior of a lesser degree. Odds are they called it off though. Trump just invents shit to save face constantly. See latching on to the idea Pence needed to stay at Trump’s property so he could visit family.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    100:1 odds that he wont
    Quote Originally Posted by freefolk View Post
    Okay. I'll stop sharing my views.

  19. #28099
    The Lightbringer Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    3,978
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    @Breccia @Thekri who gives a shit if they called it off first. The idea it was even going to happen is a fucking disgrace. Anything else is just more disgraceful behavior of a lesser degree. Odds are they called it off though. Trump just invents shit to save face constantly. See latching on to the idea Pence needed to stay at Trump’s property so he could visit family.
    I agree, but then I have been railing on these talks with the Taliban for months now. You can even find the thread I started a week ago, before this came out on the topic. The symbolic part of it being on American soil near the anniversary of 9/11 is staggering, but ultimately it is still symbolic. The truly awful part was starting these discussions in February, and it got barely any press then, despite already being an abomination. Now people only seem to care because of Trump's childish behavior surrounding it.

    This is my biggest problem with the coverage of Trump, they mask the really horrible things he does behind the clownish façade of his every day antics. We already knew almost everything about this story months ago, but it wasn't until Trump tweeted about it that it became a topic of conversation.

  20. #28100
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    I agree, but then I have been railing on these talks with the Taliban for months now. You can even find the thread I started a week ago, before this came out on the topic. The symbolic part of it being on American soil near the anniversary of 9/11 is staggering, but ultimately it is still symbolic. The truly awful part was starting these discussions in February, and it got barely any press then, despite already being an abomination. Now people only seem to care because of Trump's childish behavior surrounding it.

    This is my biggest problem with the coverage of Trump, they mask the really horrible things he does behind the clownish façade of his every day antics. We already knew almost everything about this story months ago, but it wasn't until Trump tweeted about it that it became a topic of conversation.
    For me there’s a massive difference between talking and inviting them to Camp David 3 days before the anniversary of the attack. I think diplomacy should be employed at a certain point, but Trump is shit at deal making and is the wrong man for the job.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The saddest part of all this shit is the Trumps planning to be a political dynasty. If we elect one of his children I may revert to my early 20’s level of opioid usage.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    100:1 odds that he wont
    Quote Originally Posted by freefolk View Post
    Okay. I'll stop sharing my views.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •