What’d he do, salute them while holding a steak in his hand?
Let’s see if you do.
Please describe a “win” for the U.S. when it comes this subject.
Like that matters to the meathead. (Nah, not meathead, I like meat and the animals my meat come from are smarter. What is it that comes out the other end? Yeah, that kind of head.) There have been no winning conditions possible since our glorious victory against Grenada. Even Desert Storm, we lost that. If we didn’t lose, W would not have had to return, right? There have been goals, such as capturing or eliminating Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. But Afghanistan, Iraq II, and the Africa conflicts, along with the wars on drugs, cannot be won conventionally. And anyone who thinks they can is not someone with whom can be reasoned.
Well, yes there is, if you look at what he actually said instead of just that four-word phrase:
In other words, his remarks implied that something happened “last night in Sweden” that seemed to suggest a threat to our country. But nothing of the sort did happen “last night in Sweden”.
Now, you and I know that Trump didn’t actually mean anything identifiable because he’s an inarticulate doddering old jackass who mixes up things he vaguely half-remembers with whatever point he’s trying to make at the moment. “What’s happening last night in Sweden” turned out to be trumpgobble for “alleged problems with immigrants in Sweden that I watched a Fox News story about last night”.
But from the context of his remarks, he definitely sounded as though he was referring to some alarming particular incident that took place in Sweden the previous night. The fact that Trump does such a shit job of expressing himself is entirely on him, not on his “detractors”.
Germany/Japan model. Full military occupation. US Military administration. Denazification (in this case de-radical-islamization). Suppress that ideology with full US military might like we did with the Nazi ideology. Outlaw it. Write their Constitution for them, like we did in Japan. Slowly build up civilian administration under strict control of the US, until judging that they are ready to be on their own.
Or, if you don’t think this can work, don’t even go in. Doing it half way is worse than not doing it at all.
Might reduce the Trump vote too much.
Which involved declared war against fellow nation-states which had clearly identifiable official heads of state recognizing official military leaders who were authorized to offer official surrender which was binding on the armed forces and political leadership of the nation as a whole.
Where is there any setup of that sort in any recent foreign conflict that the US has been engaged in?
Iraq. Don’t pretend that “we” wanted to do what I said but couldn’t. We could. But, “we” never wanted to.
No, his dick. :rolleyes:
He compared serving in Vietnam to the risk of STD’s he incurred while club hopping in '70’s Manhattan.
He disrespected John McCain’s service in the Vietnam War, as well as the sacrifice made my Captain Khan and his family.
Strawman.
Dolt45 now claims credit for his opposition:
Don’t disrespect SCROTUS like that. His hair is made of real mammal hair.
Well, yes, if the exception-eliminating caveat you scrawled on the rules with a crayon counts:
I’d go with Cowardly Lion, but you may have a point. Trump could use a brain, too.
Cowardly Lion was always brave. And Scarecrow was always smart. You didn’t learn the lessons of that movie did you? That explains a lot.
“Obstruct and resist”? Like how the Republicans obstructed and resisted the 2013 budget over the ACA?
I’d go with the Wizard – conning people to do stuff for him and handing out diplomas and other trinkets that don’t really convey anything.
But overthrowing the government of Iraq (which we achieved quite handily, by the way) was pitched to the public as a means of overthrowing al-Qaeda. Which it turned out to have basically nothing to do with.
The problem wasn’t that we couldn’t or wouldn’t try to “win”, it’s that the conflict we engaged in wasn’t substantially related to the alleged objective of “winning”.
Declaring war on an official nation-state as a pretended proxy for defeating amorphous insurgent/terrorist blobs is not comparable to declaring war on an official nation-state in order to change the actions of that official nation-state. Knocking down the house doesn’t kill the roaches, no matter how earnest and determined your “will to win”.
Will Trump learn the cowardly Lion’s lesson in time to make the Correspondent’s Dinner?
This gets better. The White House orchestrated a coverup using Nunes – they contacted both him and Richard Burr, and had them downplay the Russian connections to reporters. What you stated above is the coverup.
Confirmed, too.