Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

1 | ... | 271 | 272 | 273 | 274 | 275 | 276 | 277 | 278 | 279 | 280 | 281 | ... | 2483

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714509 2-Feb-2017 15:06

Stan:

Fred99:

Stan:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

Your first point is just conjecture.

You don't know much about Bannon's ideology/theology do you?

Think about Bannon's statements on record where he states that war is coming against all islam (not just ISIS), his condemnation of secularism - and ask yourself why he wants the GOP to "go nuclear" to confirm a conservative christian fundamentalist judge to the SCOTUS with great urgency.

He might not be able to get past "wise generals" to directly initiate war against islam, but it's more than just "conjecture" that his goal is to bring about a "final showdown". It's what Bannon argues for.

So far nobody has been able to stop him - to the point that there's an alt:right authoritarian racist lunatic as the President's right hand man.

We sill see I am willing to give him a year

I'm willing to give him as long as the people who actually vote in US elections give him: it's not my bailiwick since I am not a US citizen and do not vote in their elections and no one else's opinions are relevant.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19077 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16330

Lifetime subscriber

#1714511 2-Feb-2017 15:09

Pumpedd:

He can't last a year....you dont treat your closest allies like this. I am assuming it to be a factual report as it was from Washington Post. They are also speaking tough with Iran.

Good comments in SMH under the article....Aussie and NZ should ditch 5 eyes or w/e its called and let the US go....go to bed with a snake..expect to get bitten etcetc.

Even better, we should share 5 eyes with the Europeans.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Stan

929 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 183
Inactive user

#1714517 2-Feb-2017 15:20

Geektastic:

Stan:

Fred99:

Stan:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

Your first point is just conjecture.

You don't know much about Bannon's ideology/theology do you?

Think about Bannon's statements on record where he states that war is coming against all islam (not just ISIS), his condemnation of secularism - and ask yourself why he wants the GOP to "go nuclear" to confirm a conservative christian fundamentalist judge to the SCOTUS with great urgency.

He might not be able to get past "wise generals" to directly initiate war against islam, but it's more than just "conjecture" that his goal is to bring about a "final showdown". It's what Bannon argues for.

So far nobody has been able to stop him - to the point that there's an alt:right authoritarian racist lunatic as the President's right hand man.

We sill see I am willing to give him a year

I'm willing to give him as long as the people who actually vote in US elections give him: it's not my bailiwick since I am not a US citizen and do not vote in their elections and no one else's opinions are relevant.

That is true in some aspects but we live in a globalized world and you can have for better or worse influence on people living in the United States one example would be I run a youtube channel its fairly causal with a few 100,000 views.

Less than 1% of my content is watched in New Zealand, I have never dived in to politics on my channel but I could if I wanted to and influence voters.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1714520 2-Feb-2017 15:23

I had unsubscribed from this mess but I just had to add this. What a plonker.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/89023836/this-is-the-worst-deal-ever-donald-trump-badgers-and-brags-in-call-with-australias-malcolm-turnbull

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714625 2-Feb-2017 18:51

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

I also don't buy in to the "whataboutism" propaganda about "what Obama did. While US foreign policy has sucked for > 1/2 century, Obama inherited Bush's disastrous legacy - and Trump did support Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I very strongly believe that you've been taken in by a false prophet. Time will tell.

If you find that photos of the faces of dead children killed as collateral damage in military action "disgusting" - then perhaps instead of blaming "the left" or "Obama" - think about the future that Trump may well be bringing.

Perhaps those people aren't from "the left" at all - you've clearly missed the point of my post - which is that the people most likely to (mis)use that image for political purposes are the extremists themselves. Trump just handed them a gift - a tool for radicalising new recruits.

Cannot agree. is this child a result of Trump? Thats the first headline I read. That is clickbait to the max

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1714626 2-Feb-2017 19:01

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

I also don't buy in to the "whataboutism" propaganda about "what Obama did. While US foreign policy has sucked for > 1/2 century, Obama inherited Bush's disastrous legacy - and Trump did support Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I very strongly believe that you've been taken in by a false prophet. Time will tell.

If you find that photos of the faces of dead children killed as collateral damage in military action "disgusting" - then perhaps instead of blaming "the left" or "Obama" - think about the future that Trump may well be bringing.

Perhaps those people aren't from "the left" at all - you've clearly missed the point of my post - which is that the people most likely to (mis)use that image for political purposes are the extremists themselves. Trump just handed them a gift - a tool for radicalising new recruits.

Cannot agree. is this child a result of Trump? Thats the first headline I read. That is clickbait to the max

Absolutely irrelevant. He has stated he wants to target and kill terrorist's families and children.

ISIS will use it - nothing surer.

And despite being irrelevant, it's confirmed that Trump ordered the raid - not Obama.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714627 2-Feb-2017 19:05

Fred99:

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

I also don't buy in to the "whataboutism" propaganda about "what Obama did. While US foreign policy has sucked for > 1/2 century, Obama inherited Bush's disastrous legacy - and Trump did support Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I very strongly believe that you've been taken in by a false prophet. Time will tell.

If you find that photos of the faces of dead children killed as collateral damage in military action "disgusting" - then perhaps instead of blaming "the left" or "Obama" - think about the future that Trump may well be bringing.

Perhaps those people aren't from "the left" at all - you've clearly missed the point of my post - which is that the people most likely to (mis)use that image for political purposes are the extremists themselves. Trump just handed them a gift - a tool for radicalising new recruits.

Cannot agree. is this child a result of Trump? Thats the first headline I read. That is clickbait to the max

Absolutely irrelevant. He has stated he wants to target and kill terrorist's families and children.

ISIS will use it - nothing surer.

And despite being irrelevant, it's confirmed that Trump ordered the raid - not Obama.

So, if Obama was in power this raid would not have taken place?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1714628 2-Feb-2017 19:11

MikeB4:

I had unsubscribed from this mess but I just had to add this. What a plonker.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/89023836/this-is-the-worst-deal-ever-donald-trump-badgers-and-brags-in-call-with-australias-malcolm-turnbull

Wait 'til he starts on us (NZ).

Netanyahu - emboldened by Trump - and Bannon's vision for a judeo-christian war against Islam - has announced an expansion of settlements. He had said that the resolution we signed was a "declaration of war".

If Trump can launch into a rant like that against the leader of one of the USA's most loyal "friends", I suspect we're going to be torn to shreds if NZ speaks out. That's why I'm not "disappointed" by Bill E's mild criticism of Trump's Muslim ban (at this stage). Once the dust has settled and there's a new order (so NZ knows who our friends are), then's the time to speak out.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1714631 2-Feb-2017 19:14

tdgeek:

Fred99:

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

I also don't buy in to the "whataboutism" propaganda about "what Obama did. While US foreign policy has sucked for > 1/2 century, Obama inherited Bush's disastrous legacy - and Trump did support Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I very strongly believe that you've been taken in by a false prophet. Time will tell.

If you find that photos of the faces of dead children killed as collateral damage in military action "disgusting" - then perhaps instead of blaming "the left" or "Obama" - think about the future that Trump may well be bringing.

Perhaps those people aren't from "the left" at all - you've clearly missed the point of my post - which is that the people most likely to (mis)use that image for political purposes are the extremists themselves. Trump just handed them a gift - a tool for radicalising new recruits.

Cannot agree. is this child a result of Trump? Thats the first headline I read. That is clickbait to the max

Absolutely irrelevant. He has stated he wants to target and kill terrorist's families and children.

ISIS will use it - nothing surer.

And despite being irrelevant, it's confirmed that Trump ordered the raid - not Obama.

So, if Obama was in power this raid would not have taken place?

If Obama had done it, then ISIS would have no argument that a POTUS who'd boasted that he was going to willingly kill children had done it!

Do you not understand how that will be used?

Have you read ISIS propaganda?

It's very well done - lies with a sprinkling of truth of course - extremely professionally presented, with a target audience equally as stupid as the "WWC" who elected Trump - except once radicalised they're far more dangerous.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714632 2-Feb-2017 19:18

Fred99:

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

I also don't buy in to the "whataboutism" propaganda about "what Obama did. While US foreign policy has sucked for > 1/2 century, Obama inherited Bush's disastrous legacy - and Trump did support Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I very strongly believe that you've been taken in by a false prophet. Time will tell.

If you find that photos of the faces of dead children killed as collateral damage in military action "disgusting" - then perhaps instead of blaming "the left" or "Obama" - think about the future that Trump may well be bringing.

Perhaps those people aren't from "the left" at all - you've clearly missed the point of my post - which is that the people most likely to (mis)use that image for political purposes are the extremists themselves. Trump just handed them a gift - a tool for radicalising new recruits.

Cannot agree. is this child a result of Trump? Thats the first headline I read. That is clickbait to the max

Absolutely irrelevant. He has stated he wants to target and kill terrorist's families and children.

ISIS will use it - nothing surer.

And despite being irrelevant, it's confirmed that Trump ordered the raid - not Obama.

And if the attack eliminated key ISIS leaders and had no collateral damage? I am against Trump, but there needs to be a line of sensibility. If an attack is determined, does that require an Executive order? Does that require debate? It requires the judgement of the leaders on the front line. Or are we saying that under Obama, or anyone else, past or possible, that there were no casualties? And that its all about Trump on the hour to hour goings on in war?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714634 2-Feb-2017 19:21

Fred99:

tdgeek:

Fred99:

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Well Stan, I think you're being very optimistic. I expect that Trump - who campaigned on threats to use violence, with the support of Bannon - who's reputed to have some kind of OCD fixation on the military, Trump himself wanting to increase US military spending (from already insane levels) - it's a potential global disaster. Combine that with Trump's complete lack of any diplomatic skill - he's made it clear that he alone is calling the shots - it seems inevitable.

I also don't buy in to the "whataboutism" propaganda about "what Obama did. While US foreign policy has sucked for > 1/2 century, Obama inherited Bush's disastrous legacy - and Trump did support Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I very strongly believe that you've been taken in by a false prophet. Time will tell.

If you find that photos of the faces of dead children killed as collateral damage in military action "disgusting" - then perhaps instead of blaming "the left" or "Obama" - think about the future that Trump may well be bringing.

Perhaps those people aren't from "the left" at all - you've clearly missed the point of my post - which is that the people most likely to (mis)use that image for political purposes are the extremists themselves. Trump just handed them a gift - a tool for radicalising new recruits.

Cannot agree. is this child a result of Trump? Thats the first headline I read. That is clickbait to the max

Absolutely irrelevant. He has stated he wants to target and kill terrorist's families and children.

ISIS will use it - nothing surer.

And despite being irrelevant, it's confirmed that Trump ordered the raid - not Obama.

So, if Obama was in power this raid would not have taken place?

If Obama had done it, then ISIS would have no argument that a POTUS who'd boasted that he was going to willingly kill children had done it!

Do you not understand how that will be used?

Have you read ISIS propaganda?

It's very well done - lies with a sprinkling of truth of course - extremely professionally presented, with a target audience equally as stupid as the "WWC" who elected Trump - except once radicalised they're far more dangerous.

I said So, if Obama was in power this raid would not have taken place?" Has there been no casualties under Obama's 8 years? No collateral damage? Do you think war is interested in the daily rants of Trump?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1714636 2-Feb-2017 19:28

tdgeek: And if the attack eliminated key ISIS leaders and had no collateral damage? I am against Trump, but there needs to be a line of sensibility. If an attack is determined, does that require an Executive order? Does that require debate? It requires the judgement of the leaders on the front line. Or are we saying that under Obama, or anyone else, past or possible, that there were no casualties? And that its all about Trump on the hour to hour goings on in war?

Trump said he was going to kill children - and he did.

If he deliberately killed the child of a friend of yours, I expect that you'd want to skewer him.

Digmarx

139 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 29
Inactive user

#1714637 2-Feb-2017 19:31

tdgeek:

I said So, if Obama was in power this raid would not have taken place?" Has there been no casualties under Obama's 8 years? No collateral damage? Do you think war is interested in the daily rants of Trump?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a textbook tu quoque fallacy.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714640 2-Feb-2017 19:40

Digmarx:

tdgeek:

I said So, if Obama was in power this raid would not have taken place?" Has there been no casualties under Obama's 8 years? No collateral damage? Do you think war is interested in the daily rants of Trump?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a textbook tu quoque fallacy.

For fellow readers "

You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism."

So, how about answering my question? Obama, who I like, was in power for 8 years. Trump who I dislike along with most here has been in power less then two weeks. So, did those who recommended to Trump, while they are on the front line with the intelligence they required, ask Trump what do do? or did they ask their next up the chain to make a decision? Did Trump actualy get involved? In this day to day war time activity? If there its a shooting tomorrow in the US, do we blame Trump?

If your obsessed, yes. If your not obsessed,look back on the last 30 years+

Cop out post

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41121

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1714641 2-Feb-2017 19:48

Fred99:

Netanyahu - emboldened by Trump - and Bannon's vision for a judeo-christian war against Islam - has announced an expansion of settlements. He had said that the resolution we signed was a "declaration of war".

Until the neo-nazis turn to Israel...

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

1 | ... | 271 | 272 | 273 | 274 | 275 | 276 | 277 | 278 | 279 | 280 | 281 | ... | 2483