"We're going to war, bro."
- Thread starter str8line
- Start date
Why on earth after the cohorts in prison, lawsuits, frauds, sexual assaults, lies, childish behavior, threats, Ukraine dirt-digging, etc. would you claim people against Trump are clinging to something?
Do you have kids? Will you let them go to war and possibly die the Middle East if called upon by Trump because of his recent action?
I'm assuming you didn't read my post.
Red
Well-Known Member
I suspect the Iranian leaders are, at this point, and at the very least, asking themselves "what is this guy Trump capable of?". They have to respond, but they must be concerned with what type of response will not unleash more then they would bargain for. Now they know that Trump, unlike the time he called off a drone strike with minutes to spare, won't always just sit back and do nothing.
How this affects the election will depend in part on what unfolds in front of us moving forward.
The "sane and thoughtful" advisors, like Mattis, are gone now. Bolton is on the sidelines cheering for regime change. Pompeo wants regime change.
I find it hard to believe that Bolton, if he testifies at the impeachment trial, would want to hurt Trump badly enough to elect a Democrat in November. On the other hand, he is such a war hawk, maybe he feels he has enough to actually topple Trump, get appointed National Security Advisor a second time, under a President Pence, and resume pushing for regime change in Iran. Nobody wants full out war with Iran more then Bolton. And Pompeo has made it clear he sees Iran through the prism of biblical prophecy, as in the end times. I'd rather our foreign policy leaders not be immersed in history as evengelicals see it.
How this affects the election will depend in part on what unfolds in front of us moving forward.
The "sane and thoughtful" advisors, like Mattis, are gone now. Bolton is on the sidelines cheering for regime change. Pompeo wants regime change.
I find it hard to believe that Bolton, if he testifies at the impeachment trial, would want to hurt Trump badly enough to elect a Democrat in November. On the other hand, he is such a war hawk, maybe he feels he has enough to actually topple Trump, get appointed National Security Advisor a second time, under a President Pence, and resume pushing for regime change in Iran. Nobody wants full out war with Iran more then Bolton. And Pompeo has made it clear he sees Iran through the prism of biblical prophecy, as in the end times. I'd rather our foreign policy leaders not be immersed in history as evengelicals see it.
I read it. You said people have gotten desperate at what they cling to regarding Trump. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
So you're good with Trump in general but against what exactly? The assassination? The threats? The military buildup?
New foreign entanglements.
Could you predict this outcome based on Trump's behavior?
The answer to that question can't be divorced from alternatives, and like I said there's a lot of nuance of why I oppose it that your question isn't addressing when framed from that context.
The bottom line of my point is that having an assumption that this "won't affect him" is a bit odd as, to this date, nothing else has affected him, and I think this is one that certainly could, yet it's being dismissed to appeal to an inaccurate belief regarding those who voted for Trump, which speaks to the complete lack of awareness that drives the Trump phenomenon.
How about a yes or no answer? Or explain the nuance. Is being on the brink of war defensible by your nuance?
You act like the brink of war means that the US is about be invaded. If there is a war with Iran, then Israel is going to take the brunt of attacks by both Iran and its proxies.
And to answer the other question, yes being on the brink of war is defensible. If you aren't willing to go to war, then your only option is appease the terrorists/dictators/facists.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
This.
Though the answer to your question is simple. Trump is a republican. That's the only characteristic required for republicans to vote for him.
Same goes for most democrats. If trump were the Democratic candidate last election and Hillary was republican then the Dems who hate Trump would have voted for him and the repubs who hate Hillary would have voted for her.
Partisan idiots gonna partisan idiot
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
We're not going to war. lol
First, we'd have to vote on that. No way the Pelosi House will vote for war.
Secondly, just a small portion of Trump's base would support another war in the Middle-East. I think patience (and dollars) for that region ran out over a decade ago.
First, we'd have to vote on that. No way the Pelosi House will vote for war.
Secondly, just a small portion of Trump's base would support another war in the Middle-East. I think patience (and dollars) for that region ran out over a decade ago.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Russiagate? lol
You gotta love how Trumpers find a way to ignore/dismiss the most obvious and blatant crimes of this administration while believing in the dumbest and most evidence free conspiracies (Pizzagate, Epsteingate, Hunter did something in Ukrainegate)...
If they hit us and we hit them we are probably at war. I would say sending 3500 troops over there is basically war. It sure is spending like it's war.
War is not occupying Iran because that would result in hundreds of thousands of soldiers deaths. War will be us blowing s*** up and them blowing s*** up. They might target our civilian population stateside with a big bomb at some point... martyr-style. Then it is Trump's move and his ego won't let that fly.
Sent from my SM-G930V using JazzFanz mobile app
There is your recipe for Trump becoming a mass murderer because of his arrogance and stupidity.
Sent from my SM-G930V using JazzFanz mobile app
Sent from my SM-G930V using JazzFanz mobile app