Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 255: A Holiday Present From Tulsi

(+) Yeah! (+)

Corrik7 posted...

Our responsibility is to the American Citizens. Whether they let their country descend into chaos shouldn't be a main concern of the United States. What should be a concern of the United States is when there is a threat to American Citizens.

This response has nothing to do with what you quoted. Are you a bot?
---

Corrik, there was zero threat to Americans from Iraq until we invaded. Saddam wasn't a fool, he wasn't going to attack us.

---

Also right now at the American Embassy in Iraq there is a threat to American citizens

What do?
---

red sox 777 posted...

But what if the UN tells the US to do something and we refuse?

We are not bound to the UN or their directives. The UN Resolution saying war was an acceptable conclusion to flaunting the rules was our justification for going to war with a nation who was a threat to us and was flaunting said resolution. We had every right to go to war with Iraq with that reasoning. We weren't bound to.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also right now at the American Embassy in Iraq there is a threat to American citizens

What do?

We should probably pull all Embassy officials from the country and evaluate the threat and how to deal with it.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Our responsibility is to the American Citizens. Whether they let their country descend into chaos shouldn't be a main concern of the United States. What should be a concern of the United States is when there is a threat to American Citizens.

What about the Americans who give their lives in these pointless wars? What is owed to them?

---

red sox 777 posted...

Corrik, there was zero threat to Americans from Iraq until we invaded. Saddam wasn't a fool, he wasn't going to attack us.

You would be a fool to not take threats credibly until they bring your destruction. This is no different than Israel pre-emptively striking Iran who said the day they have nukes they would wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. Who in their right mind waits to see if they are full or shit or not. You, as a government of the people, are responsible to protect them.

---

GildedFool posted...

What about the Americans who give their lives in these pointless wars? What is owed to them?

Utmost respect. Which Liberals seem so apt to refuse to do with their disrespecting of our Flag and Anthem, which are symbols of respect to those who fell to make our country and our country itself that they sacrificed themselves for.

---

Corrik7 posted...

You would be a fool to not take threats credibly until they bring your destruction. This is no different than Israel pre-emptively striking Iran who said the day they have nukes they would wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. Who in their right mind waits to see if they are full or shit or not. You, as a government of the people, are responsible to protect them.

And when did Iraq make threats like that to us? Iran has threatened Israel over and over, I'm not aware of any time when Iraq initiated such threats against the US or the threats had any credibility (the Iraqi information minister's bluster about driving the infidels to London and Washington really didn't feel threatening at all).

---

Corrik7 posted...

Utmost respect. Which Liberals seem so apt to refuse to do with their disrespecting of our Flag and Anthem, which are symbols of respect to those who fell to make our country and our country itself that they sacrificed themselves for.

This is the part that is being disrespected.
---

By Corrik's logic we should be destroying North Korea 1000 times over by now.

Leafeon13N posted...

By Corrik's logic we should be destroying North Korea 1000 times over by now.

What was their Christmas present by the way? I missed it
---

I don't know why y'all are arguing with someone who clearly doesn't give a single fuck about the 20~ US military suicides per day caused largely by our middle east invasions. A number that completely dwarfs all combat deaths and even 9/11 (which is why you really know he doesn't give a shit about our troops). It's not even about money or legal threats.

He'll hang up a flag (under the Trump 2020 banner of course) July 4th and sleep like a baby either way.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

What was their Christmas present by the way? I missed it

Baby Yoda Chia Pet.

---

Leafeon13N posted...

By Corrik's logic we should be destroying North Korea 1000 times over by now.

Probably.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also right now at the American Embassy in Iraq there is a threat to American citizens

What do?

An immediate investigation at the State Department into Secretary Clinton's responsibility in designing and maintaining the infrastructure and security at the embassy. We probably can't finish the investigation without finding her emails though.

---

By Corrik's logic the US and USSR would have already destroyed each other decades ago.

---

Corrik7 posted...

You would be a fool to not take threats credibly until they bring your destruction.

You need to learn to recognize a joke and not get so triggered xfd

---

red sox 777 posted...

By Corrik's logic the US and USSR would have already destroyed each other decades ago.

If the President assesses that eliminating a threat is a greater protection to US citizens than not, it almost assuredly should be done. The President's goal is to protect United States Citizens and their constitutionally protected freedoms.

---

Corrik: No cold wars, only heat death of the universe wars.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If the President assesses that eliminating a threat is a greater protection to US citizens than not, it almost assuredly should be done. The President's goal is to protect United States Citizens and their constitutionally protected freedoms

So basically, might makes right. We don't attack North Korea precisely because they have nuclear weapons. They have the ability to strike back and therefore it's in our best interests not to start a war.

---

red sox 777 posted...

So basically, might makes right. We don't attack North Korea precisely because they have nuclear weapons. They have the ability to strike back and therefore it's in our best interests not to start a war.

If our President assesses that it would take more American Citizen's lives to attack them than to not attack them, we should explore the avenue in which an attack does not occur. Yes. Obviously. Unless our freedoms would be infringed upon otherwise.

---

oh for all the shit we give north korea they were 100% correct to rush nukes and refuse any other options. we've proven multiple times already that if you disarm, we fuck you.

also while i fully support the policy banning robocalls i do wonder what the language they're using is to do so. this feels like it could be one of those "devil's in the details" bills depending on what powers it gives/what extra data collection they can do.


---

For a change in topic: Here's Buttigieg claiming that the writers of the Constitution didn't understand that slavery was a bad thing.

https://twitter.com/keithellison/status/1211460414770417665

Ellison is subtweeting and doesn't name Buttigieg, but it was him and the first reply in the thread has the video. Aside from the instance Ellison points out, even Ted Cruz dunked on him by quoting John Adams decrying slavery as evil.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If our President assesses that it would take more American Citizen's lives to attack them than to not attack them, we should explore the avenue in which an attack does not occur.

Well I guess we never need to ask Corrik the Trolley Problem
---

xp1337 posted...

For a change in topic: Here's Buttigieg claiming that the writers of the Constitution didn't understand that slavery was a bad thing.

https://twitter.com/keithellison/status/1211460414770417665

Ellison is subtweeting and doesn't name Buttigieg, but it was him and the first reply in the thread has the video. Aside from the instance Ellison points out, even Ted Cruz dunked on him by quoting John Adams decrying slavery as evil.

Pete did not have High Hopes for the founders moral capacity
---

you fools. slavery was only recognized to be evil in the 1840s when Harriet Tubman first discovered an enormous network of trains built underneath America.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If our President assesses that it would take more American Citizen's lives to attack them than to not attack them, we should explore the avenue in which an attack does not occur. Yes. Obviously. Unless our freedoms would be infringed upon otherwise.

Also hidden in here is Corriks unqualified support of the AUMF
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

you fools. slavery was only recognized to be evil in the 1840s when Harriet Tubman first discovered an enormous network of trains built underneath America.

Real talk, I was an adult before I realized it was not a literal underground railroad
---

xp1337 posted...

For a change in topic: Here's Buttigieg claiming that the writers of the Constitution didn't understand that slavery was a bad thing.

https://twitter.com/keithellison/status/1211460414770417665

Ellison is subtweeting and doesn't name Buttigieg, but it was him and the first reply in the thread has the video. Aside from the instance Ellison points out, even Ted Cruz dunked on him by quoting John Adams decrying slavery as evil.

Oh come on, Thomas Jefferson also blamed King George III for inciting slave revolts. Beyond the Preamble, the Declaration of Independence is a list of articles of impeachment, and they are more unfair than the articles of impeachment the Democrats have passed against Trump. King George is blamed for absolutely eyerything.

---

Poor monarch

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also hidden in here is Corriks unqualified support of the AUMF

How did it take you 100 posts to figure that out? He would've voted for every single US war in the past 50 years, and only lamented it 10 years later "I guess we shouldn't have done that, oh well... let's try it again, fuck the troops"

---

Its textbook Corrik that both the Iraq War could have been done better but was also a good thing because the President assessed it was.

---

To I hope no one's surprise, Trump's North Korea photo-op bullshit was a complete failure, and Kim Jong Un has announced that they're going back to testing nukes:

https://twitter.com/Cirincione/status/1212140841348878336

---

Also this is a real tweet from today

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1212126024575660035

---

Ill bite

Whats his twisted logic
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

To I hope no one's surprise, Trump's North Korea photo-op bullshit was a complete failure, and Kim Jong Un has announced that they're going back to testing nukes:

https://twitter.com/Cirincione/status/1212140841348878336

Not a failure at all. There isn't a deal yet. The framework of the deal has already been found - it will need to involve a massive flow of capital into North Korea so that it can be rebuilt on the China model while also giving NK enough security for Kim Jong Un to feel safe.


---

Corrik7 posted...

We should probably pull all Embassy officials from the country and evaluate the threat and how to deal with it.

This actually seemed like a reasonable thing to do, but no, instead we are deploying 750 troops to the area for support
---

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/31/world/australia/fires-red-skies-Mallacoota.html?searchResultPosition=1

apocalyptic scenes from a fire in Australia is a more ominous start to 2020 than I could have possibly imagined

---

https://thehardtimes.net/news/dnc-offers-help-drop-ball/

Throwback for the New Year

---

I'm considering donating to the DNC as they'll probably manage to use it to hurt the Democratic Party!

---

red sox 777 posted...

I'm considering donating to the DNC as they'll probably manage to use it to hurt the Democratic Party!

If that's your rationale then might I suggest donating to the Justice Democrats, whose entire goal is to fight the Democratic Party?

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Ill bite

Whats his twisted logic

He is insinuating that he didn't let embassy officials die on his watch without support and sent them troops.

---

foolm0r0n posted...

How did it take you 100 posts to figure that out? He would've voted for every single US war in the past 50 years, and only lamented it 10 years later "I guess we shouldn't have done that, oh well... let's try it again, fuck the troops"

I would never say fuck the troops, and I wouldn't lament most wars. We are decisively victorious in basically every war. We just have a failure of media attention. The only war we weren't decisively victorious in was the Korean War. (In the past 120 years).

---

Ok Ill bite

How did we win the Vietnam War?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Ok Ill bite

How did we win the Vietnam War?

We were killing the enemy at a ratio of 100:1. We just decided to pull out and not support South Vietnam anymore, who lost the war to the North. The North Vietnamese could never defeat our forces, and we could have killed every last person in the entire country 10,000 times over before they could have defeated our force if we stayed. We just chose not to. That is not a defeat on our end. It was a defeat for the South Vietnamese. We decisively were winning the war. We just bowed down to liberals crying about the war because they cannot support their country ever and withdrew. Nothing else. We did not lose that war, despite how the media would love to portray it.

---

how many relatives of yours die from agent orange michael?

---

I didnt lose I just chose not to win
---

Also I find it interesting that you can support leaving Iraq before the military wants to, yet also decry liberals who wanted to leave Vietnam before the military wanted to as unpatriotic.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also I find it interesting that you can support leaving Iraq before the military wants to, yet also decry liberals who wanted to leave Vietnam before the military wanted to as unpatriotic.

Mission was accomplished in Iraq. We toppled the government and destroyed their ability to wage war.

---