User

Huh? Biden is trying to play both sides right now. He came out strong for Israel at first, when it was easy to do so, when it was easy to be outraged at the Hamas actions. Since then he has been directing most of his ire to Israel and threatening them with weapons, bailing on them in the UN, putting out mush in the press taking sides against them in their conduct of the war...

No, I am smart enough to read the details that the number you are using is not destroyed, but destroyed or "damaged" with no real meaning behind what "damaged" could mean, anything from some rubble on the roof or whatnot... The number of buildings and structures actually "destroyed" is much less than that.

Yes, this makes perfect sense. You have been supporting Putin/Russia this whole time, you justify the war for them, of course you wanted them to win from the beginning. Yeah, all your arguments here clearly show whose side you are on... The Russians. You sit here with more condemnation and criticism of America for something they never did to excuse Putin to justify the war. You don't want peace. You just want Russia to win the war, the war you justify, more quickly. Wanting peace would have been no invasion to begin with.

Nice dodge. Russia is not the superior force, at least not anywhere near as much, if we help Ukraine. Reality isn't an issue for me, it certainly appears to be for you.

Have not. I already asked before if you were lying or if you needed me to educate you here. Which is it?

Won't be able to run? He is running now. None of the DOJ cases are going to make it to court before the election at this rate. Whatever happens in New York, even many of the ardent Trump haters concede, will not likely end in any jail time even if found guilty.

Yes, that would have to be in your imagination since it did not exist in reality.

Yes, but the duplicity of your argument here is that you want to leave Russia as the superior force giving no help to Ukraine.

No, they are not in "giant concentration camps" of Israel. Palestinians travel to Jordan to travel abroad from there all the time. Gaza is a bit different, because Hamas has been at war with Israel repeatedly since the mid 2000's. So, Israel has a lot more restrictions on what it takes to travel from there. The whole population is not held hostage, and if another country like Egypt offered to take them in, Israel would gladly let many of them go... but, guess what? Many other countries don't want a bunch of terrorists destabilizing their country, too; they are glad to let Israel deal with the mess instead. Trying to compare this to a literal Nazi Concentraion is camp is not only absurdly moronic, but it is especially disgusting figuring that Hitler used those camps to systematically kill MILLIONS of Jews. Israel is not doing any such thing to the Palestinians.

I am no more imposing my "opinion" on someone else here than I am in saying it is wrong to kill anyone for the mere convenience of it.

I no more want to "control" women than I do anyone else when it comes to killing a human life. I don't have to be a woman any more than I have to be homeless to say it is wrong to stab a homeless person to death. You refuse to engage honestly here on what the issue is, and continue to try to attack the motives falsely.

Control... how? I no more want to "control" them than I do anyone else in saying it is wrong to kill someone for the mere convenience of it. Again, you can't argue honestly or in good faith, so you must resort to these petty attempts to attack the motives falsely.

You are attacking the motives because you can't argue honestly based on the facts. Obviously, having armed SRO's in schools helps deter and stop shootings or respond to them much much faster. Having hard security measures in place helps prevent guns from getting into schools. These are facts. To the point, you tried to argue that folks only offered thoughts and prayers, that was wrong. That folks don't want to change anything, these are changes. We already do things about this today. We are not doing nothing. Folks support harsher punishments for wrongdoers as well. It is the left here that continues to let criminals back out on the streets with no bail policies, "equity" based justice... soft on crime mentalities. I know how our current system works, that is not what I asked you. I asked you to explain what you think a real background check is. Your positions and arguments are all anti-gun.

When you can't argue facts honestly, you have to resort to strawman arguments attacking motives instead. I don't presume to know anything about what anyone goes through before killing someone else for the mere convenience of it... I don't need to in order to say that killing people for the mere convenience of it is wrong.

Yes. There is an SOP for executing a search warrant. That doesn't change because it was Maralago. The fact that there was or was not any Secret Service there has nothing to do with anything.

That is all you got? You are not telling the truth here. You started off this whole thing trying to post this dishonesty of trying to say there was an agreement to not expand NATO to Ukraine. No such agreement existed. You tried to claim that it was Clinton that started the expansion... NATO has been expanding since its inception. I outlined how many times and how many countries. You are the one who doesn't like the truth here. You are the one pushing Putin's propaganda to help Putin justify his invasion, an invasion you want to further support by abandoning Ukraine.

No, the House of Representatives is barely controlled by the GOP. The Democrats control the Senate. We are not talking about the political process of impeachment, we are talking about the criminal process by the DOJ. Biden did break the law with classified documents, the DOJ chose not to try to press charges against him because he is a old man who can't remember anything. None of what you said proves I am a liar, it just proves you are ignorant about Congress and are trying to distract from the criminal process by bringing up impeachment instead.

The Secret Service is there for the protection of the President, not the protection of the search warrant. These agencies have entirely different purposes and meanings behind what they are securing. Yes, there is ALWAYS a need to have use of force in the SOP, because you can't know the future and pretend like it always going to be Unicorns and Rainbows. Where was it "suggested" the use of force might be necessary? It was their standard SOP paperwork.

Those are changes. Do you not get it? You claim to not be anti-gun. So... that means there will be gun ownership. There are guns. You can't simply pretend like you can somehow stop all people from ever being bad or doing bad things, not even the other countries can do this. Protecting children is part of a layered strategy to... protect children. Those are changes. Do you think putting a no gun sign on the door and declaring them gun free zones stops bad people from doing bad things? If so... then you are the one who is far worse than anyone saying "thoughts and prayers" What does this mean? What is a real background check? Here you go again... I thought you were not anti-gun, so what is your issue with a lawful industry that makes guns? Here you go again, I thought you were not anti-gun, so now you oppose having guns for self-defense?

Dude what? As I already told you, NATO has been expanding since is inception. It is part of its charter. It was expanding before that meeting and after... there was never any deal to not expand. There was no "promise" other than talks that amounted to no deal. 1949 – The 12 founding members 1952 – The accession of Greece and Türkiye 1955 – The accession of Germany 1982 – The accession of Spain 1999 – The first wave of post-Cold War enlargement 2004 – The second wave of post-Cold War enlargement 2009 – The accession of Albania and Croatia 2017 – The accession of Montenegro 2020 – The accession of North Macedonia 2023 – The accession of Finland 2024 – The accession of Sweden https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.htm Stop pushing Putin's propaganda to justify his invasion.

Spend more time on your Meteor survival program. It will create more value for you than being afraid of this.

I am saying there was no deal. Period. Discussions do not equal deals. You started by saying there was a deal, not that there were discussions about a deal. No, the Russians were not naive. Putin is using this as propaganda. The Russians before him never made any proclamations about such a deal, including Gorbachev, who they were dealing with. Where did Gorbachev ever make any such proclamations about a deal? No, he said there was no such deal: "We now have a very authoritative voice from Moscow confirming this understanding. Russia behind the Headlines has published an interview with Gorbachev, who was Soviet president during the discussions and treaty negotiations concerning German reunification. The interviewer asked why Gorbachev did not “insist that the promises made to you [Gorbachev]—particularly U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s promise that NATO would not expand into the East—be legally encoded?” Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”" https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/ You are here pushing Putin propaganda to justify his invasion of Ukraine. This is why I say you support Putin.

No, the scene was not "secured" by another agency. The FBI was there to execute a search warrant; the other agency was not. This did nothing to make blue-on-blue violence possible. The SOP for the execution of a search warrant was standard. They put that language into all their executions. This is just a silly political stunt of phony outrage being pushed on the right now.

These are very separate and distinct points. I do not agree with the execution of the search warrant, I do not think it was to portray him as a terrorist - it was just a search warrant. None of this has anything to do with basic SOP for FBI operations. I already explained this, use of force SOP in the execution plan for any warrant is the same. There was nothing special here with Trump.

They are federal law enforcement agents sworn in as capable of killing people 24/7/365 in the enforcement of laws. It has nothing to do with who, what, when, where, or why. If they go to their family Christmas dinner, they can be armed and able to enforce the law with deadly force if needed.