I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He accomplished directing the country into a state where someone like Trump was able to get elected.
I've seen this one before, where trump getting elected is Obama's fault. What got trump elected is the mentality that thinks he got elected because of Obama.
ESP was elected because most people are cynical and think that everyone that has a govt job is a sponge.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
Oh boy, sure a lot of garbage to sift through in that article.....just don't know where to start, so I won't.
Rodrigo Duterte? Hahaha.....Seriously?
Yeah. Best to not even start.
You just did a Obama's fault cut and paste, told me to read more from your link, and then highlighted that I said they "don't come up with much"? You just reinforced what I said.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
Oh boy, sure a lot of garbage to sift through in that article.....just don't know where to start, so I won't.
Rodrigo Duterte? Hahaha.....Seriously?
Yeah. Best to not even start.
You just did a Obama's fault cut and paste, told me to read more from your link, and then highlighted that I said they "don't come up with much"? You just reinforced what I said.
You asked what about Obama's foreign policy is a disaster. That article outlines it for you. Pretty straight forward.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
Oh boy, sure a lot of garbage to sift through in that article.....just don't know where to start, so I won't.
Rodrigo Duterte? Hahaha.....Seriously?
Yeah. Best to not even start.
You just did a Obama's fault cut and paste, told me to read more from your link, and then highlighted that I said they "don't come up with much"? You just reinforced what I said.
You asked what about Obama's foreign policy is a disaster. That article outlines it for you. Pretty straight forward.
I was hoping to get your own thoughts on it. I could've googled that.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
Why does the author only go back 16 years? And The war criminal Henry Kissinger? Seriously? What's the toll of the Afghan and Iraq Wars from 2001 and 2003 to 2008? Since we're comparing the "past 16 years?" And what do you know of Rodrigo Duterte? I look forward to Trump abandoning the NATO alliance and using the monetary savings to help pay for the three trillion in tax cuts he pledged.
I don't know how else to communicate this, because you're a broken record. A presidential candidate in a democratic society may only be deemed ineligible on legal grounds. In the nearly year and a half since Trump began campaigning, the people and the courts have both failed to prove any substantial link to Trump and illegal activities. If the legal route fails, then it falls on the people to debate and discuss reasonably to reach the outcome they desire by convincing Trump supporters otherwise, and by convincing undecideds/uncarings to decide/care. Non-Trump supporters such as yourself failed at doing this, and your dissatisfaction should only be pointed inwards.
The three threads you were active on prior to the election (and as far as I can tell not a mention of Trump any time prior to the election): -This is why you can not hate Justin Bieber -Article: Albums ranked from worst to best -Binaural Live...Was there a Reason
Maybe you should've given a shit and worked on that reasonable debate and discussion at a time when it mattered, instead of waking up to tell the world why you don't like the outcome and that it should be changed because it hurts your feelings. Know what Germany would have done if a Trumpian candidate was running? Debate and discuss, and convince his supporters that they are wrong about him, like you and all Americans opposed to him should've done WHEN IT MATTERED. This is not done by insulting or belittling his supporters, nullifying their voices, or defining them as morally corrupt and therefore not worth your time or effort. It is done with facts and evidence.
You're wrong on the facts and evidence part. Trump voters were ignoring the facts and voting emotionally. Clinton needed to match this emotional message with her own message that connected on the same frequency. Policy debate wasn't going to shift many trump voters.
Correct.
Trump either knowingly or unknowingly ran a very successful campaign understanding the fact that the simple person's vote counts just as much as any other.
'I'll make your wildest dreams come true"... "Let's make America great again"... and "I'm gonna build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" proved to be very useful campaign tactics.
He's an unabashed master manipulator. Just seems that some people don't mind being manipulated
Almost reminds me of all the "Hope and change" rhetoric of the previous election.
He accomplished much more than you'd ever care to admit. He could have accomplished much more if the Repubs hadn't sat in congress with their arms across their chest.
He could have accomplished much more if the democrats didn't pass Obamacare and get slaughtered in every down ballot election from 2010 onward. His only domestic achievement is about to be repealed while his foreign policy record is one of absolute disaster. His party has collapsed and descended into one that only has identity politics left. A legacy to celebrate for sure.
What about foreign policy is an absolute disaster? I've asked people who claim this to clarify, but they don't come up with much.
Seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
Niall Ferguson sums it up pretty well:
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
Oh boy, sure a lot of garbage to sift through in that article.....just don't know where to start, so I won't.
Rodrigo Duterte? Hahaha.....Seriously?
Yeah. Best to not even start.
You just did a Obama's fault cut and paste, told me to read more from your link, and then highlighted that I said they "don't come up with much"? You just reinforced what I said.
You asked what about Obama's foreign policy is a disaster. That article outlines it for you. Pretty straight forward.
I was hoping to get your own thoughts on it. I could've googled that.
Oh. Well I've been giving my thoughts on these issues all over the AMT for the last couple of years. This was before Trump even came into the picture. Ferguson captures it all pretty concisely but if you want my similar thoughts dip into a couple of the Iraq threads, or the Iran thread, or Putin, or Libya, or ISIS, or Israel, or Turkey etc. I have outlined countless times how Obama's lack of leadership created a vacuum that was and still is being filled by the worst of mankind and only willful blindness would prevent one from seeing it.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Took the lid off Pandora's box.
In other words... served as the catalyst.
Kind of like starting wild fires in Tennessee and blaming the fire departments for the death and destruction.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Took the lid off Pandora's box.
In other words... served as the catalyst.
A catalyst for the 2003-2009 period certainly. At that point victory was still achievable but then the withdrawal came. Again this is all in the other thread. That moment has been lost and the collapse of Iraq spread to Syria and beyond. The predicted genocide and destruction secondary to Obama's absolute negligence has now far surpassed the damage of the initial invasion. Throw on top of that an emboldened ISIS and the penetration of Russia and Iran into those regions along with a now authoritarian Turkey and you have a knot that may never be untied. A continued American presence could have prevented all of this but unfortunately the naivety of these boards found a soulmate in the white house.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Took the lid off Pandora's box.
In other words... served as the catalyst.
Kind of like starting wild fires in Tennessee and blaming the fire departments for the death and destruction.
You have the analogy wrong. In some very dry locations forestry services will do something called a "controlled burn". It comes with some risk but the theory is if you burn some areas now it will prevent the almost certain raging fire later. So the correct analogy would be a new fire chief coming in 3/4 of the way through the controlled burn and saying "fuck it...the fire is pretty much under control and this isn't my problem anymore." At that point the raging fire begins.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Took the lid off Pandora's box.
In other words... served as the catalyst.
Kind of like starting wild fires in Tennessee and blaming the fire departments for the death and destruction.
You have the analogy wrong. In some very dry locations forestry services will do something called a "controlled burn". It comes with some risk but the theory is if you burn some areas now it will prevent the almost certain raging fire later. So the correct analogy would be a new fire chief coming in 3/4 of the way through the controlled burn and saying "fuck it...the fire is pretty much under control and this isn't my problem anymore." At that point the raging fire begins.
Nice of you to compare starting a war on innocents in Iraq and declaring premature victory as a "controlled burn." I wonder if holocaust survivors think of themselves in a similar fashion? No wonder Kissinger is an idol of yours.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Took the lid off Pandora's box.
In other words... served as the catalyst.
Kind of like starting wild fires in Tennessee and blaming the fire departments for the death and destruction.
You have the analogy wrong. In some very dry locations forestry services will do something called a "controlled burn". It comes with some risk but the theory is if you burn some areas now it will prevent the almost certain raging fire later. So the correct analogy would be a new fire chief coming in 3/4 of the way through the controlled burn and saying "fuck it...the fire is pretty much under control and this isn't my problem anymore." At that point the raging fire begins.
Nice of you to compare starting a war on innocents in Iraq and declaring premature victory as a "controlled burn." I wonder if holocaust survivors think of themselves in a similar fashion? No wonder Kissinger is an idol of yours.
The wildfire analogy is your's I just corrected the inaccuracies. That being said it actually works well in this context...so thank you...you accidentally turned out to be illuminating this one time. However, as you know, there was no "war on innocents" so there are still some things to keep working on.
Well, Trump just helped save a 1,000 jobs in Indiana at Carrier. Not all jobs will be saved but at least some have. Someone actually gave a damn about real people. These jobs would have stayed gone under the Hillary administration. A drop in the bucket but a start.
"In exchange for keeping the factory running in Indianapolis, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence are expected to reiterate their campaign pledges to be friendlier to businesses by easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code, according to a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump."
Great, so now I have to subsidize these jerks? What ever have happened to boot straps and personal responsibility? Can't they turn a profit without special favors? Sounds like corporate handouts to me. Don't blame me when the price of air conditioners soars.
Talk to me like I'm a novice. Didn't Bush Jr create the vacuum with the Iraq war?
No. The Iraq war took the lid off Pandora's box and inserted America's military in the epicenter of a collapsing middle east. The withdrawal from Iraq along with the pullback of American leadership globally created the vacuum. It is all in the "knowing what you know now..." thread.
Took the lid off Pandora's box.
In other words... served as the catalyst.
Kind of like starting wild fires in Tennessee and blaming the fire departments for the death and destruction.
You have the analogy wrong. In some very dry locations forestry services will do something called a "controlled burn". It comes with some risk but the theory is if you burn some areas now it will prevent the almost certain raging fire later. So the correct analogy would be a new fire chief coming in 3/4 of the way through the controlled burn and saying "fuck it...the fire is pretty much under control and this isn't my problem anymore." At that point the raging fire begins.
Nice of you to compare starting a war on innocents in Iraq and declaring premature victory as a "controlled burn." I wonder if holocaust survivors think of themselves in a similar fashion? No wonder Kissinger is an idol of yours.
The wildfire analogy is your's I just corrected the inaccuracies. That being said it actually works well in this context...so thank you...you accidentally turned out to be illuminating this one time. However, as you know, there was no "war on innocents" so there are still some things to keep working on.
No innocents killed in the invasion and occupation of Iraq? In an unnecessary war? Invading another country under false pretenses and killing innocents isnt waging war on innocents? But when your hero saint Kissinger did the same in Cambodia and Laos, what's a few 100 thousand more brown people in the ash heap of history?
The fire or "controlled burn" as you so aptly put it, didn't need to be started and was in fact well contained prior to March of 2003 but you'll never admit it was a colossal and abject failure and disaster. Just like you probably believe Kissinger has been the greatest diplomat of the 20th century and shouldn't be branded a war criminal.
Has Saudi Arabia gotten the bomb yet? The boogeyman Middle East nuclear arms race taken off yet?
Please tell us the fable of how the Sunni Awakening and the 170,000 US troops in Iraq spread peace and democracy throughout the Middle East. Please? We need a great holiday fable to lift our spirits.
I'm more interested in Trump eradicating ISIS and scrapping the Iranian nuclear deal, plus bringing peace and democracy to Libya and Syria. He campaigned on it, he got elected and he owns it.
"In exchange for keeping the factory running in Indianapolis, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence are expected to reiterate their campaign pledges to be friendlier to businesses by easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code, according to a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump."
Great, so now I have to subsidize these jerks? What ever have happened to boot straps and personal responsibility? Can't they turn a profit without special favors? Sounds like corporate handouts to me. Don't blame me when the price of air conditioners soars.
"In exchange for keeping the factory running in Indianapolis, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence are expected to reiterate their campaign pledges to be friendlier to businesses by easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code, according to a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump."
Great, so now I have to subsidize these jerks? What ever have happened to boot straps and personal responsibility? Can't they turn a profit without special favors? Sounds like corporate handouts to me. Don't blame me when the price of air conditioners soars.
Saved 1000 jobs.
Yep, give him credit. He did something he campaigned on. Let's not overlook how the deal was cut though. That should matter even more and what it means down the road.
Comments
He consistently campaigned on this. Destroy ISIS.
Once that is done there may be a few less threads on AMT about attacks claimed by them.
"Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure, most obviously in the Middle East, where the smoldering ruin that is Syria—not to mention Iraq and Libya—attests to the fundamental naivety of his approach, dating all the way back to the 2009 Cairo speech. The President came to believe he had an ingenious strategy to establish geopolitical balance between Sunni and Shi’a. But by treating America’s Arab friends with open disdain, while cutting a nuclear deal with Iran that has left Tehran free to wage proxy wars across the region, Obama has achieved not peace but a fractal geometry of conflict and a frightening, possibly nuclear, arms race. At the same time, he has allowed Russia to become a major player in the Middle East for the first time since Kissinger squeezed the Soviets out of Egypt in the 1972-79 period. The death toll in the Syrian war now approaches half a million; who knows how much higher it will rise between now and Inauguration Day?
Meanwhile, global terrorism has surged under Obama. Of the past 16 years, the worst year for terrorism was 2014, with 93 countries experiencing an attack and 32,765 people killed. 2015 was the second worst, with 29,376 deaths. Last year, four radical Islamic groups were responsible for 74 per cent of all deaths from terrorism: ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In this context, the President’s claims to be succeeding against what he euphemistically calls “violent extremism” are absurd. Much opprobrium has been heaped on Donald Trump in the course of the past year. But there was much that was true in his underreported August 15 foreign policy speech on the subject of Islamic extremism and the failure of the Obama Administration to defeat it. The “Obama Doctrine” has failed in Europe, too, where English voters opted to leave the EU in defiance of the President’s threats, and where the German leadership he recently praised has delivered, first, an unnecessarily protracted financial crisis in the European periphery and, second, a disastrous influx to the core of migrants, some but not all of them refugees from a region that Europe had intervened in just enough to exacerbate its instability. The President has also failed in eastern Europe, where not only has Ukraine been invaded and Crimea annexed, but also Hungary and now Poland have opted to deviate sharply from the President’s liberal “arc of history.” Finally, his foreign policy has failed in Asia, where little remains of the much-vaunted pivot. “If you look at how we’ve operated in the South China Sea,” the President boasted in an interview published in March, “we have been able to mobilize most of Asia to isolate China in ways that have surprised China, frankly, and have very much served our interest in strengthening our alliances.” The new President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, apparently did not receive this memorandum. In October he went to Beijing’s Great Hall of the People to announce his “separation from the United States.”
You should really take the time to read the whole thing since the people you speak to "don't come up with much".
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/11/21/donald-trumps-new-world-order/
Rodrigo Duterte? Hahaha.....Seriously?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
In other words... served as the catalyst.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
unfortunately the naivety of these boards found a soulmate in the white house
Nuff said
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
An AMT approved media outlet link.
Great, so now I have to subsidize these jerks? What ever have happened to boot straps and personal responsibility? Can't they turn a profit without special favors? Sounds like corporate handouts to me. Don't blame me when the price of air conditioners soars.
The fire or "controlled burn" as you so aptly put it, didn't need to be started and was in fact well contained prior to March of 2003 but you'll never admit it was a colossal and abject failure and disaster. Just like you probably believe Kissinger has been the greatest diplomat of the 20th century and shouldn't be branded a war criminal.
Has Saudi Arabia gotten the bomb yet? The boogeyman Middle East nuclear arms race taken off yet?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©