Trump actions kill 63 Canadians

[Yzermandius19]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Well Reagan came across as a basically kind and decent fellow.  There’s too much narcissism and belligerence in Trump’s persona, and America First comes off as excessive greed and supremacy.  Trudeau has his own issues and the opposite problem of talking a good line with too little realism to be taken seriously.  Ultimately it comes down to wise and honourable statesmanship.  

At times I’ve seen Trump show decency, but the general impression is brash and amoral.  Part of leadership is making sacrifices for the greater good.  Acting alone for one’s own benefit is a short game.  I’m thinking here about problems that can only be solved through international cooperation, such as tensions in the Middle East, climate change, and even trade imbalances.  

Evaluating Presidents on personality traits rather than job performance is a dumb way to evaluate Presidents. Actions speak louder than words, when are you ever going to learn that? Your faith in international cooperation to solve Middle East issues, climate change and trade imbalances is laughable, international cooperation is vastly overrated by naive wishful thinkers who think the only reason major world problems haven't been fixed is not enough globalism.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Rue]

18 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Evaluating Presidents on personality traits rather than job performance is a dumb way to evaluate Presidents. Actions speak louder than words, when are you ever going to learn that? Your faith in international cooperation to solve Middle East issues, climate change and trade imbalances is laughable, international cooperation is vastly overrated by naive wishful thinkers who think the only reason major world problems haven't been fixed is not enough globalism.

I concede your first sentence in the sense that in assessing anyone and how they perform overly relying  on one category of reference is not accurate. Many productive people are bastards.

In the case of Trump all I will say is there a hell of a lot of more than him being an asshole that gives many people concern about his competency.

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, Rue said:

I concede your first sentence in the sense that in assessing anyone and how they perform overly relying  on one category of reference is not accurate. Many productive people are bastards.

In the case of Trump all I will say is there a hell of a lot of more than him being an asshole that gives many people concern about his competency.

In the case of Trump I view him as a productive bastard, he's hired to do the job, not be Mr. Nice Guy. If you have concerns about his job performance, that is the best material to attack him with, not his personality. If all your problems with him are personality based, then you have no good argument against Trump whatsoever. The thing about most Trump Haters is, they get caught up on personality concerns and never have good criticisms of his actions, while his supporters often have way better criticisms of him, despite not hating him.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Rue]

19 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t have to try anything.  Trump has given his blessing to Putin and Xi’s dictatorships.  In fact he’d like one himself.  Maybe if Trump had shared the assassination plan with allies, they could have prepared and a plane full of innocents wouldn’t have been downed.  Oh wait, Trump says fuck you to allies.  

In all fairness his allies have no problem in what he did. The relationship with Putin may also not be as deep as you think.

[Rue]

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

In the case of Trump I view him as a productive bastard, he's hired to do the job, not be Mr. Nice Guy. If you have concerns about his job performance, that is the best material to attack him with, not his personality. If all your problems with him are personality based, then have no good argument against Trump whatsoever.

I have to concede that. I think most would.

[Boges]

The Trump Admin has provided no credible evidence that Solemani was about to greenlight an attack on any US Embassies. 

His cabinet are even saying that there was no information indicating an attack was imminent. 

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, Boges said:

The Trump Admin has provided no credible evidence that Solemani was about to greenlight an attack on any US Embassies. 

His cabinet are even saying that there was no information indicating an attack was imminent. 

He doesn't have to provide that evidence. Solemani's job is to greenlight terror attacks, you don't need the time, date and location of those attacks nailed down before you take him out, he's done it before, and he would have done it again. I've seen no evidence that he reformed his ways and was going to stop with the terrorism any time soon.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Boges]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

He doesn't have to provide that evidence. Solemani's job is to greenlight terror attacks, you don't need the time, date and location nailed down before you take him out.

Then why make that excuse initially. It was clearly a lie. Par for the course with Trump. 

He's moved off of that and now just says, "I killed a bad guy". 

He could probably use that justification for killing a lot of people that pose no threat to US public safety. 

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, Boges said:

Then why make that excuse initially. It was clearly a lie. Par for the course with Trump. 

He's moved off of that and now just says, "I killed a bad guy". 

He could probably use that justification for killing a lot of people that pose no threat to US public safety. 

Who cares why he made that excuse initially? You always get up on the smallest nitpicks to attack Trump, try picking your battles with him better, for once in your life. He is not going to use the justification for why he killed Solemani and apply that to someone who poses no threat to America whatsoever, he did it to take one of the top terrorists in the world, those who aren't legitimate terrorists have no cause to worry at this point, because that was part of the criteria, not just simply being a bad guy.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Boges]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

Who cares why he made that excuse initially? You always get up on the smallest nitpicks to attack Trump, try picking your battles with him better, for once in your life. He is not going to use the justification for why he killed Solemani and apply that to someone who poses no threat to America whatsoever, he did it to take one of the top terrorists in the world.

Pointing out he lies all the time is just TDS 

I'm sure you'd happily point out all the times JT lies. 

To the point of the thread. This assassination led to increased tensions that directly led to the deaths of some 60 Canadians. No debating that. And because it was clearly not done to "defend the US"

[Rue]

19 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Very true, but domestic Canadian rhetoric has long protested this reality...long before Trump.

The Trump haters think they are being original and righteous....only to fool themselves.

Oh hell not righteous or original.... also I know the difference between Trump and POTUS and when they come into legal  conflict do you? Thanks though for the concern but back to the issue containing Iran is a task the US takes on thank you for that. Our bearded leader Justin hisses but that is the about it. We also now have secret weapon, a midget Super Minister always in red and ready to toss her hair but no missiles.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Rue

[Yzermandius19]

7 minutes ago, Boges said:

Pointing out he lies all the time is just TDS 

I'm sure you'd happily point out all the times JT lies. 

Wrong. Pointing out that a politician lies is like pointing out that the sky is blue, doesn't matter which side the politician is on. Lying is in the job description fool, start focusing on politicians actions, not their words. If you are criticizing their words, it's because you don't have good enough material to attack them on their actions, or you are getting caught up attacking something that is irrelevant and ignoring what is relevant, just because you are too triggered by lies.

Politicians want you to focus on their lies, so you are too distracted to notice their actions, and you play right into their hands with your tunnel vision on their lies.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[kactus]

6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Wrong. Pointing out that a politician lies is like pointing out that the sky is blue, doesn't matter which side the politician is on. Lying is in the job description fool, start focusing on politicians actions, not their words. If you are criticizing their words, it's because you don't have good enough material to attack them on their actions, or you are getting caught up attacking something that is irrelevant and ignoring what is relevant, just because you are too triggered by lies.

Politicians want you to focus on their lies, so you are too distracted to notice their actions, and you play right into their hands with your tunnel vision on their lies.

It is naive to contemplate that Trump knew Soleimani’s whereabout....He is tipped off by the Iranian regime. Trump takes the credit for his assassination and boldening his support at home. Win win

[Zeitgeist]

20 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Evaluating Presidents on personality traits rather than job performance is a dumb way to evaluate Presidents. Actions speak louder than words, when are you ever going to learn that? Your faith in international cooperation to solve Middle East issues, climate change and trade imbalances is laughable, international cooperation is vastly overrated by naive wishful thinkers who think the only reason major world problems haven't been fixed is not enough globalism.

Only a complete idiot would think that climate change can’t be addressed without global solutions.  On Iran, in several days hundreds of people have died due to an unfolding of events that wouldn’t have started without the assassination of that general.  No, the US didn’t down that airline, but the downing of that airline is more “collateral damage” of a go it alone manipulation of affairs in the Middle East.  Is the world a better place because of those actions?  I already know what cheerleaders like you think.  Iran’s regime is bad news, but the oppression hasn’t stopped.  

Also, leaving out personal conduct, disrespectful public behaviour in leaders isn’t good for organizations or countries.  It’s neither strong nor admirable.  People follow these examples and respond in a like manner.  Again, if Americans want belligerent leadership, that’s what they’ll get.  Whatever, USA USA USA!  “Shoot ‘em all and let God figure it out.”

Making money and strong-arming opponents aren’t the real challenges.  Restraint and generosity are harder, more important virtues, but that takes character and wisdom.  You can’t take anything with you but people remember what you leave behind.  

[Rue]

17 minutes ago, Boges said:

This assassination led to increased tensions that directly led to the deaths of some 60 Canadians. No debating that. And because it was clearly not done to "defend the US"

The assassination triggered a missile firing back into Iraq. The tensions were as high as they could get from previous Iranian provocation. Anything else is the direct result of Iranian errors. For the US to be directly the cause it would have had to order the shooting down of the jet ski your contention is incorrect.

You are trying to create a cause for the error Iran admitted  to on an assumption you can  US for increased tension.  Even if that were true that would tyen because secondary and therefore indirect cause not a direct one.

You also have no proof as to what triggered the decision to shoot down the jet. You simply assume the error could not be caused by anything but fear of the US.

Anyone who makes a decision based on being frightened as you assume raises an issue as to their training and competence.

Stop trying to reinvent what happened to suit an anti Trump bias.

I hate Trump too  but it is bs to blame him or anyone else for Iran making a mistake.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Rue

[eyeball]

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think he will get re-elected.  He’s emblematic of America today.  

Occasionally the world needs to be reminded of what it really doesn't need. Kinda like a bloody Tree of Liberty.

I imagine GW Bush is breathing a sigh of relief knowing he wasn't the stupidest president after all.  Can't wait to see what the Republicans come up with next.  Skynet probably.

Edited January 14, 2020 by eyeball

[Rue]

24 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 ON iran, in several days hundreds of people have died due to an unfolding of events that wouldn’t have started without the assassination of that general.

 No, the US didn’t down that airline...

 

 

You do not specify what you refer to and without any evidence blame HUNDREDS of murders based on an assumption.

Your assumption is predicated on the belief that if Iran is ignored nothing  bad happens.

Your assumption is illogical.

It also assumes nothing Iran does justifies a response or challenges to the decisions it makes which is also illogical.

 

Edited January 14, 2020 by Rue

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Boges said:

To the point of the thread. This assassination led to increased tensions that directly led to the deaths of some 60 Canadians. No debating that. And because it was clearly not done to "defend the US"

Leave it you to jump all over the most moronic CNN taking point of the day.

FYI - Iran sucks. Their country is a theocracy run by totally psychotic religious zealots with an entire branch of their military dedicated to an eventual genocide in Israel. Their top general sent forces to attack a US embassy, and the US military targeted that person, killing him.

You can use a word like "assassination" to avoid the reality that Suleimani was a valid military target in an undeclared war if you want, but that does not change the facts at all. Iran is ramping up tensions because they want to run the entire show in the ME (which would be extremely bad for the world, not just the ME), and the US is not backing down.

I could just as easily blame Pelosi and stooge CNN for the escalation, because their divisiveness is making the US into a ripe target. They are also pumping out pro-terrorism and pro-Iran propaganda. I could also blame Trudeau for being weak, and not supporting the US. 

How about: 

Pelosi's actions killed 63 Canadians!

or

Trudeau's gutlessness killed 63 Canadians!

You see, I don't go around saying stupid things like that, even though there's a shred of truth to them, because I'm not like CNN, Pelosi, or their legions of moronic sheep. 

I get that there's some truth to "Some of Trump's actions contributed to a scenario where 63 Canadians were killed", but to convert that to "Trump actions kill 63 Canadians", as if that was the main thrust behind what happened, is something that only a total moron would say, or regurgitate. 

[Rue]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Occasionally the world needs to be reminded of what it really doesn't need. Kinda like a bloody Tree of Liberty.

I imagine GW Bush is breathing a sigh of relief knowing he wasn't the stupidest president after all.  Can't wait to see what the Republicans come up with next.  Skynet probably.

If the fact that Trump may be asshole is  germaine to the decision to kill the general, then necessarily the general being an asshole is equally as  germaine.

The decision made to take out the general was based on other factors and certainly not simply Trump being an asshole.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Rue

[eyeball]

8 minutes ago, Rue said:

The decision made to take out the general was based on other factors and certainly not simply Trump being an asshole.

According to David Frum it was based on some mullah's tweet that triggered Trump.

[Zeitgeist]

15 minutes ago, Rue said:

You do not specify what you refer to and without any evidence blame HUNDREDS of murders based on an assumption.

Your assumption is predicated on the belief that if Iran is ignored nothing  bad happens.

Your assumption is illogical.

It also assumes nothing Iran does justifies a response or challenges to the decisions it makes which is also illogical.

 

Explain the logical steps that should have followed the assassination.  None of us know why it happened or the moves that led to it.  I’m surprised you have that level of trust.  

[kactus]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Explain the logical steps that should have followed the assassination.  None of us know why it happened or the moves that led to it.  I’m surprised you have that level of trust.  

Gen. Soleimani being no 2 posed a direct threat to the authority of the supreme leader. The position of the supreme leader has been shakey for some time now. Sanctions have taken their toll on the indigenous population. People are not happy with the regime and I doubt any country will grant entry to the supreme leader if the situation turns regime change... The ayatollah will do anything to survive or justify their existence even it means killing Iranians as was evident in the recent protests across the country or tip off Soleimani’s whereabouts to Trump's administration. Afterall, making Trump look good will massage his ego. Khamenei made damn sure he could make a martyr out of the killing of Soleimani by the Americans. The death of Soleimani helped the regime to build support and bring people to ballot boxes for the election that is happening in Iran soon. It also helped Trump to come out triumphant now that the devil general is dead. It will also help his chances for the second term and dilute the impeachment process. 

Iran then takes a so called "hard revenge" by attacking US bases in Iraq. No one is killed or injured surprisingly....Haleluja...
 

Now with Soleimani dead I suspect there is something about the general the ayatollah does not want to disclose.

Edited January 14, 2020 by kactus

[Yzermandius19]

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

According to David Frum it was based on some mullah's tweet that triggered Trump.

David Frum has Trump Derangement Syndrome. Trump doesn't assassinate people based on tweets, it's idiotic to suggest that he does.

[Yzermandius19]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

Restraint and generosity are harder, more important virtues, but that takes character and wisdom.  You can’t take anything with you but people remember what you leave behind.  

If all you have is "I don't like Trump's character", that is a very weak argument against him, and it's pitiful that these are the best anti-Trump material you have. You are also a very poor judge of character, if you think Trump is so much worse than the alternatives, even on the character tip.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[WestCanMan]

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

According to David Frum it was based on some mullah's tweet that triggered Trump.

So David Frum's theory is that an American was killed and an embassy was attacked (among other things) but Trump killed Suleimani just because of a tweet? LMAO!

This reminds me of a time when my wife had a girl working for her who would come to work and at least once a week she'd tell the dumbest story I ever heard. I'd always think "ok, that's gotta be the 'story to end all stories' but like clockwork she'd one-up herself every other week.

One day she comes in and says that her boyfriend made her sleep outside the bedroom because she got home late. Not on the couch though, she had to sleep on the floor by the bedroom door. The next week her and her boyfriend say they're going to get a rental and start a grow-op although they already made well over $100K between them, legally, and they were both under 21. I said "fire her now, you can't fix stupid." Then she tells us that her boyfriend just got "promoted" lol in his side job, where he was selling weed, and he was now selling crystal meth, crack, heroine and coke. I said fire her now, she's a f'ing moron. Nope, didn't fire her. Then she said that they were going to do a grow op in their own basement. I said fire her. Nope, just talked her out of it. Then she said "my boyfriend and his buddy are going to buy their own crackhouse and sell stuff out of there there so that his boss doesn't get all the profit". She finally got fired, and one month later they were involved with a shooting and lied to the police about it. They got busted down by their druggy friends and had to pay back a massive amount of money, plus they got arrested. That was 8 years ago, and until this thread started, I had never seen a stupidity one-upmanship contest quite like it.