| |
Discussion: U.S. Election 2016
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Why is inadvertently in quotation marks? Are you saying Hillary intentionally "armed ISIS" (a reach, misplace of blame and smudging of facts)?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 21,143
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Skywalker
Way to attack the HIV activists and not even address their complaint.
 |
Who's this quote from?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 59,596
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 10,242
|
Not Trump refusing to debate Bernie backfiring 
This makes it easier for the first female presidential nominee to win POTUS! 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/27/2010
Posts: 9,806
|
Sanders or Trump. Hillary broke the law. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/28/2011
Posts: 27,495
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Why is inadvertently in quotation marks? Are you saying Hillary intentionally "armed ISIS" (a reach, misplace of blame and smudging of facts)? |
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by hooky
Not Trump refusing to debate Bernie backfiring
This makes it easier for the first female presidential nominee to win POTUS! |
It did make both of them look like clowns.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 10,242
|
I will say that if Trump can convince me that he won't be irrational and will have a great cabinet, I may vote for him. At this point I'd vote for the Libertarian candidate over him, even McAfee.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 21,143
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Skywalker
|
Jfc, I thought it was from some Facebook commenter, not his senior policy advisor. 
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Javan
|
Did you actually read that before posting?
1. She says she wanted to arm Syrian rebels, not ISIS. Yes, the two are different 
2. She clearly says she wanted to arm the moderates, but Obama decided against it.
3. She has said that she feels the rebels were not trained properly and that if they went with her plan (because they didn't), it would've been a better policy move.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Javan
I never understood this excuse. What did Bernie know that Hillary didn't? Does she not have a mind of her own.
Furthermore what was sensible about greenlighting weapon shipment to Syria and "inadvertantly" arming ISIS?
 |
First of all, that has nothing to do with anything I said. I said the judgment call itself was, in context, not poor.
Second, I REALLY don't appreciate your quotes implying she intentionally armed ISIS.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
First of all, that has nothing to do with anything I said. I said the judgment call itself was, in context, not poor.
Second, I REALLY don't appreciate your quotes implying she intentionally armed ISIS.
|
To be fair to him, I don't think he was trying to be messy/funny with that. I just think he usually doesn't research properly before posting.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/28/2011
Posts: 27,495
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RatedG²
!!!
And in February of this year he was quoted as saying |
Long story short:
The war on Serbia was to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing. It was successful and prompt. Not a hawk, more like a watchdog.
That is a false description of what The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF)
And here is a direct quote on why he voted for it (at the time of the vote, not in retrospect):
"I will vote for this resolution because I believe that the use of force is one tool that we have at our disposal to fight against the horror of terrorism and mass murder. One tool but it is not our only tool, and it is something that must be used wisely… and with great discretion.“
https://www.congress.gov/congression....J.RES.%22]%7D
Now compare that to what Hillary has said about dealing with Iran.
He was wrong on the Iraq liberation act. But clearly he has grown since then. Hillary is STILL a hawk and you don't have to go as far back as 1998 to find reciepts.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/28/2011
Posts: 27,495
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
First of all, that has nothing to do with anything I said. I said the judgment call itself was, in context, not poor.
Second, I REALLY don't appreciate your quotes implying she intentionally armed ISIS.
|
Intentionally or unintentionally, armed them is what she did  How many oopsy daisies is she going to have every time she's in a position of power? Another reason why she can not be trusted.
Quote:
Originally posted by Skywalker
Way to attack the HIV activists and not even address their complaint.
|
Aldkdffgh. I'm screaming.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by hooky
I will say that if Trump can convince me that he won't be irrational and will have a great cabinet, I may vote for him. At this point I'd vote for the Libertarian candidate over him, even McAfee.
|
... what?
I'm sorry, but how on earth could he convince you of that when I know for a fact you've followed this election closely enough to hear what comes out of his mouth? How could he or a libertarian ever align with the views that led you to support Sanders? Unless, of course, literally your only issue as a voter is the establishment.
Gary Johnson has been described as a Tea Partier on the issue of taxes, wants to cut programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, and is strongly against gun control. That's not what I imagine a Sanders supporter would vote for.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Javan
Intentionally or unintentionally, armed them is what she did How many oopsy daisies is she going to have every time she's in a position of power? Another reason why she can not be trusted. |
This is so ridiculous, read a couple posts above you so you actually learn her plan didn't take effect 
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Javan
Intentionally or unintentionally, armed them is what she did How many oopsy daisies is she going to have every time she's in a position of power? Another reason why she can not be trusted. |
This is a very dense and irresponsible way of narrating things. Can you go into detail on why you feel like she armed ISIS? Or is it something you heard other people say and decided to repeat?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 59,596
|
Danny Freeman
@DannyEFreeman
.@BernieSanders tells @TheYoungTurks the "Clinton strategy" is to announce the race is "over" after New Jersey votes on June 7.
Nate SilverVerified account
@NateSilver538 Nate Silver Retweeted Danny Freeman
Clinton "strategy" is to persuade more "people" to "vote" for her, hence producing "majority" of "delegates".
Nate is getting tired of this **** too. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Javan
Long story short:
The war on Serbia was to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing. It was successful and prompt. Not a hawk, more like a watchdog.
That is a false description of what The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF)
And here is a direct quote on why he voted for it (at the time of the vote, not in retrospect):
I will vote for this resolution because I believe that the use of force is one tool that we have at our disposal to fight against the horror of terrorism and mass murder. One tool but it is not our only tool, and it is something that must be used wisely… and with great discretion.“
https://www.congress.gov/congression....J.RES.%22]%7D
Now compare that to what Hillary has said about dealing with Iran.
He was wrong on the Iraq liberation act. But clearly he has grown since then. Hillary is STILL a hawk and you don't have to go as far back as 1998 to find reciepts.
|
Umm that definitely isn't a false description of AUMF
Quote:
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organiza- tions, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
|
In layman's terms...the President is allowed to use any means necessary to wage war against any country he deems responsible. He doesn't even need proof. So military force whenever, wherever. Don't care the reason why he voted for it...he did though.
The Kosovo war destroyed many trade routes, relocated about a million refugees, and halted economic reform in all involved countries. Bernie accepts the good and the bad from this vote.
And as you conceded he was wrong about the Iraq Liberation vote (twice) just as Hillary was wrong for the Iraq war vote (once).
But as you've said
Quote:
Originally posted by Javan
Once a hawk always a hawk?
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Since we're talking, let's TALK.
One of the major factors in ISIS coming about was the Syrian civil war which started back in 2011. This came into effect because people felt as if Assad was repressing peaceful protesters. He was seen as a dictator and war criminal. Iraqi "soldiers" (future/heavily connected to ISIS) went into Syria to fight Assad. They gained a lot of power in Syria which led to them going back to Iraq, seizing lots of territory.
We can also talk about how a lot of Saddam Hussein's staffers/soldiers went to help train ISIS. Or we can talk about how Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki practically excluded/barred Sunni's from the political process, causing them to look into Sunni extremists/Islamic militants (ISIS). An error that can be attributed to Obama is that he was a backer of al-Malicki.
Finally, we can get into how the Iraqi army is/was very weak and disorganized and was not prepared for when ISIS started making gains. We are currently in Afghanistan TRAINING their army so that they can defend themselves if ISIS/Al-Queda keeps gaining power in the region, yet Bernie wants to remove our presence there which arguably did help the rise when did the same thing in Iraq.
|
|
|
|
|
|
