Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)
-   -   What Did President Trump Do Now? (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/87986-what-did-president-trump-do-now.html)

duga 04-07-2017 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djchameleon (Post 1820670)
We have been taking military actions without congressional approval since Bush Jr.'s been in office.

Typically when congress gives the president the power to do so.

djchameleon 04-07-2017 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1820671)
Typically when congress gives the president the power to do so.

I'm pretty sure they have been using executive orders and then have the backing of national security which allows them to do it without congress.

He set up that precedent.

duga 04-07-2017 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djchameleon (Post 1820673)
I'm pretty sure they have been using executive orders and then have the backing of national security which allows them to do it without congress.

He set up that precedent.

Well, any way you slice it - it's harder to get away with it without congressional input for hot topic issues. Syria is definitely a hot topic issue.

Janszoon 04-07-2017 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justthefacts (Post 1820634)
No one's saying we haven't made blunders in the past, I'm sure we all understand that, but by using chemical weapons for years and killing 400,000 civilians at this point by a regime run by a dictator, (not to mention ISIS to make things worse) fuck yeah, let's blow their shit up because you know why? Because any other country won't step up to the plate to help these people out and America always saves the day.

Are you suggesting that Assad and ISIS are on the same side?

elphenor 04-07-2017 10:30 AM

What's happening in Syria is horrific and Assad is a monster

But we can not bomb a country into stability that much should be obvious by now

Chula Vista 04-07-2017 10:38 AM

I change my mind. (temporary insanity)

https://scontent.fsan1-2.fna.fbcdn.n...21&oe=5957F5D6

Justthefacts 04-07-2017 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1820681)
Are you suggesting that Assad and ISIS are on the same side?

I don't want to say yes, but yes Assad hasn't done anything to stop the spread of ISIS which leads me to believe he's okay with monsters running around with bombs and guns and beheading Christians.

elphenor 04-07-2017 11:09 AM

We contributed to ISIS via these kinds of policies

Every time you topple a regime there, an equal or worse one will sprout up in the name of restoring stability

Frownland 04-07-2017 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justthefacts (Post 1820706)
I don't want to say yes, but yes Assad hasn't done anything to stop the spread of ISIS which leads me to believe he's okay with monsters running around with bombs and guns and beheading Christians.

He may be irresponsible, wreckless, and short-sighted with it, but all of those attacks that kill ****loads of his civilians are targeting ISIS.

elphenor 04-07-2017 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1820697)
I change my mind. (temporary insanity)

https://scontent.fsan1-2.fna.fbcdn.n...21&oe=5957F5D6

Hillary Clinton wanted to start doing intervention ****ing yesterday this country has no non-interventionalist party we are a nation with an addiction to War

Frownland 04-07-2017 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1820715)
Hillary Clinton wanted to start doing intervention ****ing yesterday this country has no non-interventionalist party we are a nation with an addiction to War

That was the biggest argument against her too. *tastes foot*

Justthefacts 04-07-2017 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1820714)
He may be irresponsible, wreckless, and short-sighted with it, but all of those attacks that kill ****loads of his civilians are targeting ISIS.

Oh great, let's try and kill terrorists all while murdering civilians and create a bigger vacuum for terrorism. Lets not forget, terrorists don't just become terrorist, they usually lose their whole family at the hands of the US or it's own country before they claim jihad. Trumps decision to blow up Assasds Air Force is great because no civilian was killed (except if you consider Assasds foot soldiers a civilian, in which case six of those bastards were killed)

elphenor 04-07-2017 11:48 AM

W
a
r

War

WAR

rostasi 04-07-2017 11:49 AM

Mr. "Just the facts":

• Nine civilians were killed in one village (including four children)
• Four more were killed in two nearby villages
• Four soldiers were killed that included an air commodore.

elphenor 04-07-2017 11:50 AM

Let's create some more refugees we can deny entrance to

Justthefacts 04-07-2017 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rostasi (Post 1820725)
Mr. "Just the facts"

• Nine civilians were killed in one village (including four children)
• Four more were killed in two nearby villages
• Four soldiers were killed that included an air commodore.

The air strikes last night killed civilians too? I had not heard of this...

rostasi 04-07-2017 11:53 AM

here

The Batlord 04-07-2017 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1820711)
We contributed to ISIS via these kinds of policies

Every time you topple a regime there, an equal or worse one will sprout up in the name of restoring stability

And finally we agree on something. Nobody seems to give a **** about the Law of Unintended Consequences, as if "six months from now" is something that happens other people. I wonder if we're all gonna wake up a week from now to hear that every member of Seal Team Six has been killed in a botched attempt on Assad's life, that might have succeeded if it hadn't been planned in thirty minutes.

Janszoon 04-07-2017 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justthefacts (Post 1820706)
I don't want to say yes, but yes Assad hasn't done anything to stop the spread of ISIS which leads me to believe he's okay with monsters running around with bombs and guns and beheading Christians.

Are you kidding? ISIS are in opposition to Assad's government. Just because ISIS is bad and Assad is bad doesn't mean they're on the same side.

Janszoon 04-07-2017 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1820714)
He may be irresponsible, wreckless, and short-sighted with it, but all of those attacks that kill ****loads of his civilians are targeting ISIS.

That's not entirely true. There are several rebel groups in Syria and Assad's attacks are directed at some of the others more than at ISIS.

duga 04-07-2017 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1820732)
And finally we agree on something. Nobody seems to give a **** about the Law of Unintended Consequences, as if "six months from now" is something that happens other people. I wonder if we're all gonna wake up a week from now to hear that every member of Seal Team Six has been killed in a botched attempt on Assad's life, that might have succeeded if it hadn't been planned in thirty minutes.

While I would be the first to agree with this as well, we have ****ed that region so hard for so long, the only way it will stabilize is if we pull out of the region COMPLETELY (not going to happen) or we fix it ourselves (only this time instead of saying we are spreading democracy while grabbin that oil and installing a despotic ruler that lets us do what we want, we actually try to prop up their governments with a legitimate democracy).

The Batlord 04-07-2017 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duga (Post 1820740)
While I would be the first to agree with this as well, we have ****ed that region so hard for so long, the only way it will stabilize is if we pull out of the region COMPLETELY (not going to happen) or we fix it ourselves (only this time instead of saying we are spreading democracy while grabbin that oil and installing a despotic ruler that lets us do what we want, we actually try to prop up their governments with a legitimate democracy).

And what are the chances for either of those? I'll just be glad if we can keep our interventionism to a relative minimum (e.g. no invasions, and if we're going to bomb someone then please don't let it be just us led by a cowboy president). Our foreign policy is too unfocused and short-term oriented to hope for anything better atm, so saying "we need to do something" is tantamount to utopianism in the current climate.

Frownland 04-07-2017 01:31 PM

It was a funny image in my head so I googled it and there it was

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClMgLdCUkAANx8_.jpg

The Batlord 04-07-2017 01:34 PM

Those three should start a cowpunk band.

duga 04-07-2017 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1820758)
And what are the chances for either of those? I'll just be glad if we can keep our interventionism to a relative minimum (e.g. no invasions, and if we're going to bomb someone then please don't let it be just us led by a cowboy president). Our foreign policy is too unfocused and short-term oriented to hope for anything better atm, so saying "we need to do something" is tantamount to utopianism in the current climate.

Well, I never said either of those things is likely.

I fully expect we'll keep bumbling down this short sighted path of imperialism until some fluke of the market occurs or hell freezes over and wars are no longer profitable.

Pet_Sounds 04-07-2017 02:58 PM

This typo made me laugh. Very American.

Quote:

McMaster, 54, was born in Philadelphia, and in part rose to his service in 1991, when he led nine tanks against an estimated 80 tanks and vehicles under Saddam Hussein’s military – the American tanks destroyed them inferior Iraqi vehicles, with no US casualties.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...-pentagon-live

elphenor 04-07-2017 04:32 PM

Should also be mentioned this strike cost up to $70 million and won't stop the slaughter

Expensive firework display

elphenor 04-07-2017 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1820732)
And finally we agree on something. Nobody seems to give a **** about the Law of Unintended Consequences, as if "six months from now" is something that happens other people. I wonder if we're all gonna wake up a week from now to hear that every member of Seal Team Six has been killed in a botched attempt on Assad's life, that might have succeeded if it hadn't been planned in thirty minutes.

We probably agree on more things than we don't

But yeah we've already seen how this plays out

Cuthbert 04-07-2017 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1820816)
Should also be mentioned this strike cost up to $70 million and won't stop the slaughter

Expensive firework display

:laughing:

Trollheart 04-07-2017 04:51 PM

I hope he got the proper tanks he deserves....
:shycouch:

Chula Vista 04-07-2017 07:08 PM

Quote:

A bipartisan group of 61 senators sent a letter to Senate leaders Friday urging them to maintain the 60-vote threshold for filibusters involving legislation, which they said is needed to ensure bipartisanship remains a component of passing bills through the chamber.

The move comes in the wake of a contentious battle this week in the Senate over the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch when the Republicans who control the chamber used the "nuclear option" to neutralize the filibuster for nominees to the Supreme Court.
"We are writing to urge you to support our efforts to preserve existing rules, practices, and traditions as they pertain to the right of Members to engage in extended debate on legislation before the United States Senate," said the letter that was spearheaded by GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware. "Senators have expressed a variety of opinions about the appropriateness of limiting debate when we are considering judicial and executive branch nominations. Regardless of our past disagreements on that issue, we are united in our determination to preserve the ability of Members to engage in extended debate when bills are on the Senate floor."
Sanity in our poilitical process anyone?

elphenor 04-07-2017 08:02 PM

Ehhh filibuster is stupid though

elphenor 04-07-2017 09:49 PM

To elaborate the way I see it let the Repubs sell the farm on this one it'll only bolster the progressives who'll soon have their seats

It was pretty ridiculous how extensively it was used against the previous democratic majority

Justthefacts 04-08-2017 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1820897)
Ehhh filibuster is stupid though

Smartest statement I've ever read you say.

djchameleon 04-08-2017 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1820908)
To elaborate the way I see it let the Repubs sell the farm on this one it'll only bolster the progressives who'll soon have their seats

It was pretty ridiculous how extensively it was used against the previous democratic majority

yeah but the ****ty part is that this ******* is now going to be in there for the rest of his life. Supreme Court Justice spot has long term effects.


Goofle 04-08-2017 04:26 AM

Gorsuch - from what I've seen - looks to be an exemplary choice. He made the guy questioning him look rather silly in fact.

OccultHawk 04-08-2017 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goofle (Post 1821039)
Gorsuch - from what I've seen - looks to be an exemplary choice. He made the guy questioning him look rather silly in fact.

Yeah. Gorsuch is great. Thank God we got someone in there who will side with the corporation for firing a guy who refused to sacrifice his life instead of following orders. But hey at least the didn't let the black president have his pick, right?

elphenor 04-08-2017 06:47 AM

The guy is cartoon villain levels of dick

elphenor 04-08-2017 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justthefacts (Post 1821029)
Smartest statement I've ever read you say.

Thanks but I don't take your opinions seriously so

Frownland 04-08-2017 08:00 AM

Ja the Gorsuch witch hunt is a big ole swing and a miss guys.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:34 AM.


© 2003-2022 Advameg, Inc.