By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump is over - Chemical Attacks Staged

 

Will you vote for Trump in 2020?

No 82 70.69%
 
Yes 34 29.31%
 
Total:116
LiquorandGunFun on 16 April 2018
Faust said:
LiquorandGunFun said:

and what form of government did he use?

 

Get all the information out there, dont skim over the part you like.

i fu**ing hate democrats if that is what r u implying. I hate them so much that i couldnt bring myself to vote for Hillary even knowing how bad Trump and the republicans are.

and about your question... errrm communism?

 

Edit: Btw projection?

Ahh the Hitler argument when the left has nothing to fight back with thats the go to, or some other BS. Means nothing and goes nowhere.

No not communism, he executed the communists. Im sorry if public education let you down.

you know, We can spend another hour going back and forth. No minds will change, some may get mad.

You look at it any way you want, I will just keep voting and voicing out against democrats and you do what you do.



 

Around the Network
VGPolyglot on 16 April 2018
Faust said:
coolbeans said:

Fair enough.  I can admit the preceding sentences weren't finely tuned.  You see: this kind of myopic personification bothers me; as though a guy born to vocal socialist parents, continually utilizing similar rhetoric in his writing, etc. can just flip a switch on his political alignments (the Xbox One of European history conveniently!).  That's especially so when you can find quotes from him like this:  "Fascism recognizes the real needs that gave rise to socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or cooperative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State."  (Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions [1935])  

Wait...if the mere existence of a private industry/privatization disputes the notion of one being 'socialist' then what the hell have I been hearing about Scandinavia's socialist utopias since my early teens, despite them hovering around a similar level of economic freedom as the USA?  But now I'm just getting a little facetious.

Not totally, no.  As I previously acknowledged with some of Hitler's actions that'd make a Middle Ages theocrat envious; however, I still consider such a categorization lacking sophistication.

 Dude, enough, i was responding to the other guy who claimed that communism and fascism are the same. All im saying is, if your are gonna strawman the hell outta any left wing policy that some people like, at least quote Stalin, Mao or any actual left wing authoritarian leader u wanna throw at us. Hitler isnt one of them.

 

Yeah, I agree, there is plenty of horrible leaders to work with in that regard, like Mao and Stalin, whom many socialists actually support, unlike Hitler.



Faust on 16 April 2018
LiquorandGunFun said:
Faust said:

i fu**ing hate democrats if that is what r u implying. I hate them so much that i couldnt bring myself to vote for Hillary even knowing how bad Trump and the republicans are.

and about your question... errrm communism?

 

Edit: Btw projection?

Ahh the Hitler argument when the left has nothing to fight back with thats the go to, or some other BS. Means nothing and goes nowhere.

No not communism, he executed the communists. Im sorry if public education let you down.

you know, We can spend another hour going back and forth. No minds will change, some may get mad.

You look at it any way you want, I will just keep voting and voicing out against democrats and you do what you do.

I vote for something, not against it. That's what i do.



Aeolus451 on 16 April 2018
Mystro-Sama said:
Aeolus451 said:
That's your opinion. He only allowed strikes on targets related to chemical weapons and didn't attack any russians. I never voted for him so the US would become a hermit nation. I voted for him on several issues. Most nations consider the usage of chemical weapons to be a red line. The US has to remain a global player.

You would have to be naive to not see through such an obvious false flag. Why would Assad gas his own people right after winning?

I don't know. He has a history of attacking civilians in this way and not caring about collateral damage so it's not out of character for him. Was it smart? No, but people tend to do stupid shit when they shouldn't. People sometimes think that leaders of anything will always be rational, wise and make the smart choices. They're fallible people like the rest of us. 

It's also possible someone within his side did it without his knowledge or that another group of people could have done it to set up Assad/to keep the US there. Personally, I tend to believe it was stupidity over something like a conspiracy.



o_O.Q on 16 April 2018
VGPolyglot said:
coolbeans said:

Fair enough.  I can admit the preceding sentences weren't finely tuned.  You see: this kind of myopic personification bothers me; as though a guy born to vocal socialist parents, continually utilizing similar rhetoric in his writing, etc. can just flip a switch on his political alignments (the Xbox One of European history conveniently!).  That's especially so when you can find quotes from him like this:  "Fascism recognizes the real needs that gave rise to socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or cooperative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State."  (Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions [1935])  

Wait...if the mere existence of a private industry/privatization disputes the notion of one being 'socialist' then what the hell have I been hearing about Scandinavia's socialist utopias since my early teens, despite them hovering around a similar level of economic freedom as the USA?  But now I'm just getting a little facetious.

Not totally, no.  As I previously acknowledged with some of Hitler's actions that'd make a Middle Ages theocrat envious; however, I still consider such a categorization lacking sophistication.

He's saying that he can understand why socialism exists and was gaining popularity, but not necessarily that they were socialist.

As for Scandinavia, that's a common misconception too, as they are social democracies, but not socialist states.

can we get a little clarification on how a socialist state would be formed without a government existing at a hierarchical level above the citizens?

i'm a socialist btw



Around the Network
VGPolyglot on 16 April 2018
o_O.Q said:
VGPolyglot said:

He's saying that he can understand why socialism exists and was gaining popularity, but not necessarily that they were socialist.

As for Scandinavia, that's a common misconception too, as they are social democracies, but not socialist states.

can we get a little clarification on how a socialist state would be formed without a government existing at a hierarchical level above the citizens?

i'm a socialist btw

So, if you're a socialist, and you say that Nazism is socialism, are you a Nazi then?



Cubedramirez on 16 April 2018
John2290 said:
Aeolus451 said:
That's your opinion. He only allowed strikes on targets related to chemical weapons and didn't attack any russians. I never voted for him so the US would become a hermit nation. I voted for him on several issues. Most nations consider the usage of chemical weapons to be a red line. The US has to remain a global player.

What chemical attacks? There was and still is no confirmation, it's all suspected. Why would they use chemical weapons when they'd already won? If there was a chemical attack last weekend Teresa May would have been the first to show the proof when announcing to the UK. Precision strikes are not fucking precise, even today. This is nothing more than a show to Russia. Don't believe the shite that this is a one time deal, Trumps composure with not one falter and no congress approval, it's all to obvious. This is an act of war against Russia plain and simple. Gritting my teeth while I wait for Russia's response. 

France, along with the US and 7 other nations have reviewed their intelligence and confirmed a chemical attack took place in Douma. Obviously you lack a understanding of the authority of the President to approve such actions so that doesn't need to be highlighted further. You say this was an act of war against Russia yet the locations hit were not Russian FOB locations; so take a step off your hyperbole soap box. 

I find this a common thread of people who don't know enough to know they don't know what they're talking about. There will not be a war between NATO and Russia, especially over strikes against the well documented monster Assad. Russia does not have the means to conduct a war against NATO and if you're counting on support from China or Iran in any conflict with NATO you'll be sorely disappointed. China depends too much on trade to maintain order at home, Iran has zero ability to conduct any major war activities whatsoever, and technological gap between NATO and these nations is monumental. Not to mention Iran has zero desire for any conflict due to reasons too numerous to detail here. 

So continue gritting your teeth if it helps you deal with the exaggerated ideas you keep coming up with.  



Cubedramirez on 16 April 2018
John2290 said:
Cubedramirez said:

France, along with the US and 7 other nations have reviewed their intelligence and confirmed a chemical attack took place in Douma. Obviously you lack a understanding of the authority of the President to approve such actions so that doesn't need to be highlighted further. You say this was an act of war against Russia yet the locations hit were not Russian FOB locations; so take a step off your hyperbole soap box. 

I find this a common thread of people who don't know enough to know they don't know what they're talking about. There will not be a war between NATO and Russia, especially over strikes against the well documented monster Assad. Russia does not have the means to conduct a war against NATO and if you're counting on support from China or Iran in any conflict with NATO you'll be sorely disappointed. China depends too much on trade to maintain order at home, Iran has zero ability to conduct any major war activities whatsoever, and technological gap between NATO and these nations is monumental. Not to mention Iran has zero desire for any conflict due to reasons too numerous to detail here. 

So continue gritting your teeth if it helps you deal with the exaggerated ideas you keep coming up with.  

On that night I'd seen multiple media outlets report Russian Trumps had entered Damascus and Trumps speech was so badly handled with information as to what he was bombing within Damascus, the concern was and still is valid. Although I'll admit, my concern was based on misinformation. I still believe this to be a preamble to a greater war than we've seen the last year. 

I do understand your concern regarding the possibility of a war and I can accept nothing I type will change your position on it. However I am a very dense person and I'll still try to ease your concerns. 

Russia cannot stand against NATO. Russia with Iran and China fully committed cannot stand against NATO. This is no secret and regardless of what opportunistic story is written on a website talking about the advancements in military technology from the Russian side, i.e. the S-400 air defense system, the fact is that they don't have the ability to defend themselves today against assets we've used for decades in multiple theaters, namely the B-1b bomber being the most recent aging asset used. I wish I could convey to you why I have zero concern because what limited information I know of our untouchable abilities in the air and sea, Russia has a far greater understanding that this isn't a fight they could ever hope to win in any measurable way. 



teamsilent13 on 16 April 2018

I’m very strongly against involvement in Syria. I like most other things he has done or tried. It’s too far out to judge everything for re-election. Against any democrat I would vote for him, and most Republicans, too. It could be that I don’t vote at all if we lack a nationalist candidate and protest with the alt-right instead. I’m not actually alt-right, but they seem to be strongly against immigration and war more than any politician in the GOP right now



o_O.Q on 16 April 2018
VGPolyglot said:
o_O.Q said:

can we get a little clarification on how a socialist state would be formed without a government existing at a hierarchical level above the citizens?

i'm a socialist btw

So, if you're a socialist, and you say that Nazism is socialism, are you a Nazi then?

humans are animals... does that mean all animals are humans?