Trump has Destroyed 80 Years of Stable Government Foreign Relations Because He Let Stephen Miller and Russel Vought Control Foreign Policy

[robosmith]

4 minutes ago, Legato said:

Where they are and how long is moot.

Still East of the pyramids.

There are hundreds of pyramids of which you are IGNORANT.

[bush_cheney2004]

10 hours ago, robosmith said:

Obama was seeking to protect REBELS from slaughter by the Libyan army.

 

Nonsense....By Obama's own admission, he wanted "regime change" in Libya even after Gaddafi made a deal in 2003 with Bush.   Libya was not a threat to the United States, but that standard only seems to apply to Trump.

Also...the aftermath of the Libyan "war that was never authorized by Congress:

Quote

President Barack Obama identified the lack of planning for the aftermath of the 2011 military intervention in Libya as the "worst mistake" of his presidency.

 

In summary....Obama bombs GOOD...Trump bombs BAD !!!!!

[robosmith]

14 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Nonsense....By Obama's own admission, he wanted "regime change" in Libya even after Gaddafi made a deal in 2003 with Bush.   Libya was not a threat to the United States, but that standard only seems to apply to Trump.

Also...the aftermath of the Libyan "war that was never authorized by Congress:

 

In summary....Obama bombs GOOD...Trump bombs BAD !!!!!

YOUR ^OPINION is NOT EVIDENCE.

Obama was seeking to protect REBELS from slaughter by the Libyan army.

Quote

President Obama initiated military intervention in Libya in March 2011, citing a moral obligation to prevent a "massacre" of civilians and rebels by Muammar Gaddafi’s advancing army, particularly in Benghazi. The mission aimed to protect civilians and halt Gaddafi's forces through a UN-mandated no-fly zone. [1, 2, 3, 4]

• Rationale: Obama argued that allowing Gaddafi to slaughter citizens would be a betrayal of U.S. values and create a humanitarian crisis.
• Action Taken: The U.S. led an initial coalition (Operation Odyssey Dawn) before transferring command to NATO to enforce the no-fly zone and attack loyalist forces.
• "Rebels" vs. "Civilians": While officially framed as protecting "civilians," the air campaign provided direct air support that allowed rebel forces to regain ground, leading to debates over whether it constituted "stealth regime change".
• Goals: The administration aimed to stop the slaughter and favored Gaddafi leaving power, but initially claimed the mission was not directly to oust him, aiming to avoid an Iraq-style nation-building scenario. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

 

 

 

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Obama was seeking to protect REBELS from slaughter by the Libyan army.

He and the 19 states that joined the coalition were looking to protect civilians...ostensibly. 

Regardless, comparing that 19 country coalition's support in dismantling a fragile regime facing open rebellion is a far cry from the typically incompetent Trumpian shit show we're seeing in the Straits.  

Edited April 7 by Moonbox

[User]

18 hours ago, Moonbox said:

He and the 19 states that joined the coalition were looking to protect civilians...ostensibly. 

Regardless, comparing that 19 country coalition's support in dismantling a fragile regime facing open rebellion is a far cry from the typically incompetent Trumpian shit show we're seeing in the Straits.  

So, you fully support the war against Iran, you just want more countries to commit to helping, like many of the NATO nations?

Cool! 

[Moonbox]

15 minutes ago, User said:

So, you fully support the war against Iran, you just want more countries to commit to helping, like many of the NATO nations?

Where did I say anything of the sort?  

For someone who complains so much about other people apparently lying, you're appallingly dishonest yourself.  

[User]

10 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Where did I say anything of the sort?  

For someone who complains so much about other people apparently lying, you're appallingly dishonest yourself.  

Well, you just contrasted the two war efforts in Libya and this one in Iran highlighting how more countries were involved.

Did you support the war in Libya? It sure seems like you does 
 

The logical conclusion if so is that if you are singing the praises of how it was done with more countries then that would apply to this war since that is your criticism criteria. 
 

That… or, you just hate Trump. 

[Moonbox]

6 minutes ago, User said:

Well, you just contrasted the two war efforts in Libya and this one in Iran highlighting how more countries were involved.

Yes, I contrasted them.  Everything beyond that was your imagination.  Like usual, you fill in the blanks with the dumbest possible assumptions and then argue against that rather than anything anyone's actually said.  

1 hour ago, User said:

Did you support the war in Libya? It sure seems like you does 

The logical conclusion if so is that if you are singing the praises of how it was done with more countries then that would apply to this war since that is your criticism criteria.

Singing what praises?  You can't even go one post without making shit up and lying again, and if that's what you're logical conclusion is based on then it isn't logic.  It's fantasy.  

Remember, I contrasted the two war efforts.  I don't need to support either to do that.  Logically, I could condemn both and still conclude the Iran conflict was more of an incompetent undertaking.  TACO Trump at it again.  

 

[User]

14 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Yes, I contrasted them.  Everything beyond that was your imagination.  Like usual, you fill in the blanks with the dumbest possible assumptions and then argue against that rather than anything anyone's actually said.  

I asked you a question. 

Speaking of imagination, look how unhinged you have become because of a simple question. 
 

You let the cat out of the bag anyhow on how you are just playing dumb games, as you refused to answer on if you supported that war in your next response. 
 

16 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Singing what praises? 

You said:

”He and the 19 states that joined the coalition were looking to protect civilians...ostensibly. 

Regardless, comparing that 19 country coalition's support in dismantling a fragile regime facing open rebellion”

The way you characterized this. 
 

So again… did you support it or not? The fact that you dodged the question proves my point. 

[Moonbox]

46 minutes ago, User said:

I asked you a question. 

Who cares?  You don't answer questions when I ask you, so why would I bother yours?  

In this case, whether or not I supported the NATO attacks on Libya has no bearing whatsoever on Trump's incompetent handling of the Iran "war".  🙃

46 minutes ago, User said:

You said:

”He and the 19 states that joined the coalition were looking to protect civilians...ostensibly. 

Regardless, comparing that 19 country coalition's support in dismantling a fragile regime facing open rebellion”

The way you characterized this. 

So again… did you support it or not? The fact that you dodged the question proves my point. 

The way YOU characterize what I said is very different than what I said, as usual.  Once again, you're just arguing against your own retarded strawman and demanding that I own opinions I've never held.  

[User]

33 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Who cares?  You don't answer questions when I ask you, so why would I bother yours?  

In this case, whether or not I supported the NATO attacks on Libya has no bearing whatsoever on Trump's incompetent handling of the Iran "war".  🙃

Well, you care. You are here crying about my response to you when all it was, was a question. 
 

34 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

The way YOU characterize what I said is very different than what I said, as usual.  Once again, you're just arguing against your own retarded strawman and demanding that I own opinions I've never held.  

Well, if you are not going to explain yourself any differently stop crying about it.

 

[Moonbox]

1 minute ago, User said:

Well, you care. You are here crying about my response to you when all it was, was a question. 

LOL.  I ignored your questions.  You're the one crying about that.  🤡

2 minutes ago, User said:

Well, if you are not going to explain yourself any differently stop crying about it.

What do I need to explain other than that your intentionally ridiculous characterization of what I said is very different from what I actually said? 

If you want to pretend this whole retarded exercise never happened and ask for clarification of my original comment, we can start there again, but I don't need to defend myself against your imagination.  

[User]

30 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

LOL.  I ignored your questions.  You're the one crying about that.  🤡

As usual, you have no point other than to be obtuse here rather than own up to the stupidity of your comment.

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

What do I need to explain other than that your intentionally ridiculous characterization of what I said is very different from what I actually said? 

If you want to pretend this whole retarded exercise never happened and ask for clarification of my original comment, we can start there again, but I don't need to defend myself against your imagination.  

Well, you seem to care an awful lot about my characterization but can’t explain how I’m wrong. 
 

Not my fault you are not more articulate and then refuse to clarify.