24 Aug 17
Originally posted by @kmax87Well, we were almost out, and now Trump wants to play Commander-in-Chief so damn badly that he's shoving more of our young men into harm's way just to pump up his ego. And all the right-wing fools who thought going into Iraq was soooooo cool for what turned out to be non-existant WMDs turned right around and bitched about Obama going into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, and suddenly HE was the warmonger.
Are we playing deja vu all over again?
If Trump stays in Afghanistan then yes, it's going to become a worse quagmire than Vietnam. When the Soviets were there, it didn't take them long to figure it out, but Mr. Dumb-As-A-Box-Of-Rocks is going to do this AND build a wall AND cut taxes for the wealthy? Probably not, even if he doesn't know it yet.
24 Aug 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @suzianneI see. Is that why Obama did it as well?
Well, we were almost out, and now Trump wants to play Commander-in-Chief so damn badly that he's shoving more of our young men into harm's way just to pump up his ego. And all the right-wing fools who thought going into Iraq was soooooo cool for what turned out to be non-existant WMDs turned right around and bitched about Obama going into Afghanistan afte ...[text shortened]... s AND build a wall AND cut taxes for the wealthy? Probably not, even if he doesn't know it yet.
At least he does not draw any red lines or give a date when he will remove troops by.
Also, he at least understands that nation building is a total waste of time and strategy should be based upon what Is occurring on the ground thus freeing up troops to operate as they feel the need to get their jobs done instead of setting up stringent rules for engagement.
At least with Trump he will not be letting out terrorists from Gitmo so they can continue as they were, nor will he take over any more countries and deliver them to ISIS on the silver platter.
So in a way, he is a vast improvement.
25 Aug 17
Originally posted by @suzianneTrump is the perfect caricature of a spoilt rich kid, who believes he only has to want something to happen, for it to be so. The minute a task calls for perseverance or just plain hard work, his interest level drops and he's out of there. A total contrast to the modest hardworking beginnings of Nixon.
....If Trump stays in Afghanistan then yes, it's going to become a worse quagmire than Vietnam. When the Soviets were there, it didn't take them long to figure it out, but Mr. Dumb-As-A-Box-Of-Rocks is going to do this AND build a wall AND cut taxes for the wealthy? Probably not, even if he doesn't know it yet.
25 Aug 17
Originally posted by @kmax87I see, so Trump is lazy.
Trump is the perfect caricature of a spoilt rich kid, who believes he only has to want something to happen, for it to be so. The minute a task calls for perseverance or just plain hard work, his interest level drops and he's out of there. A total contrast to the modest hardworking beginnings of Nixon.
How did he amass such wealth and power by being lazy?
25 Aug 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @whodeyHe learnt how to game the system in his favour effectively aligning his business enterprises with the government teat. Lazy does not mean stupid or incapable, it just means only wanting to avoid doing a proper job, it means taking shortcuts, it means shortchangeing those in your orbit and employ so that your only concern is your advancement. That's lazy, self centred, selfish and short sighted.
I see, so Trump is lazy.
How did he amass such wealth and power by being lazy?
25 Aug 17
Originally posted by @kmax87In other words, it matters little how hard you work. Instead, it only matters that you are smart about what you do?
He learnt how to game the system in his favour effectively aligning his business enterprises with the government teat. Lazy does not mean stupid or incapable, it just means only wanting to avoid doing a proper job, it means taking shortcuts, it means shortchangeing those in your orbit and employ so that your only concern is your advancement. That's lazy, self centred, selfish and short sighted.
Interesting. I reckon that is why Trump paid pennies on the dollar compared to Hillary and the rich fat cats that poured money into her campaign, yet Trump still won.
26 Aug 17
Originally posted by @whodeyPicking at the soft underbelly of repressed racism by denouncing politically correct speech was a great dog whistling act that covered all bases and made an enemy of the poor and the downtrodden. Who needs money when spewing hate draws record crowds?
In other words, it matters little how hard you work. Instead, it only matters that you are smart about what you do?
Interesting. I reckon that is why Trump paid pennies on the dollar compared to Hillary and the rich fat cats that poured money into her campaign, yet Trump still won.
26 Aug 17
Originally posted by @suzianneI'm leaning in this direction myself, but if America pulls its troops out and allows Al Qaeda, the Taliban or ISIS to fill the vacuum, I wouldn't see this as a good thing. It seems like there is no good options in Afghanistan.
Well, we were almost out, and now Trump wants to play Commander-in-Chief so damn badly that he's shoving more of our young men into harm's way just to pump up his ego. And all the right-wing fools who thought going into Iraq was soooooo cool for what turned out to be non-existant WMDs turned right around and bitched about Obama going into Afghanistan afte ...[text shortened]... s AND build a wall AND cut taxes for the wealthy? Probably not, even if he doesn't know it yet.
26 Aug 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @kmax87Obama brought 100,000 troops to Afghanistan with no tangible results of any lasting consequence.
Are we playing deja vu all over again?
The Donald sending in 4,000 extra won't change anything either; it's just an attempt to kick the can down the road. Sooner or probably much later, the US government will realize that we are not going to impose a government on the Afghan People that will not be massively resisted against by them. And then we will take our toys and go home (perhaps declaring "victory" after tens of thousands of more dead pile up).
29 Aug 17
Originally posted by @eladarNo seems to be a default for you, when the question involves a right wing politician. What makes you think I approved of Obama's continuation? I can understand that due to larger geopolitical factors that America has mired itself to an unwinnable, untenable situation. However, leaving, and the vacuum that will create, might make the Iraq withdrawal snafu, and the fertile ground upon which ISIL/ISIS/DAESH emerged seem like a quaint memory as a much larger, former superpower and well formed predator, Russia, takes the opportunity of Trump love/blindness to carve out a piece of turf for itself. Think Bush SNR and the job that Jnr had to finish off, and you could probably find motivation in the part of a few former Soviets who might feel they have yet a job to do.
When Bush was in office lIbtards like you asked the same question.
The answer was no then, why should it be different now?