Trump Presidency Round 2

[TorontoGold]

Rubio is smarter than Merkel, Yes. Miles smarter than Sullivan.

Can you read? Which number is higher - 1 or 14.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Honestly I would be 100% fine with Trump as a purely ceremonial head of state.

 

[calvegas04]

Rubio is smarter than Merkel, Yes. Miles smarter than Sullivan.

Rubio is also several times smarter than trump

 

[GATTACA!]

President Trump says he has 'no problem' with allowing oil into Cuba

Trump told reporters he would allow a Russian oil tanker to resupply Cuba, which suffers an energy crisis after the U.S. halt of Venezuelan supplies.

www.usatoday.com

TACO

 

[Irish#1]

I already gave you a reason? Read it again.

Bishop is in a league of his own, he’s fooled but the dumbest posts because he can’t understand how to do simple fact checks. Why else would he continue to be embarrassed? Remember when you posted fake tweet and you did it to catch me calling you out for posting it, but Bishop actually thought it was real? Noticed you never commented on that blunder lmao.

Collateral damage, but not the point.

 

[Bantry19]

You and Ben Rhodes may foolishly (gullible?) think that the JCPOA was going to stop Iran, but all Obama did was provide cash and sanctions relief to a terrorist regime. Rubio perfectly called the shot a decade ago. It set them up for nuclear technology and a pathway for future weapons grade enrichment. I’ll take the Rubio approach over the Rhodes/Sullivan approach any day.

The best read I’ve seen today on the situation in Iran-

So what’s Trump doing by easing Iranian oil sanctions to the tune of $14B?

Providing cash and sanctions relief to a terrorist regime we’re currently at war with?

4D chess…

I challenge you to start getting your news and analysis from a source other than X/social media.

 

[TorontoGold]

Collateral damage, but not the point.

The point was to troll me into thinking you posted a fake tweet without knowing. I took the bait because you’ve done that a few times. But regardless, your little exercise proved that Bishop is not bright enough to actually fact check something and he has no place to tell anyone they just accept things because of bias. No matter how much cover you want to do, these are the facts.

 

[Irish#1]

The point was to troll me into thinking you posted a fake tweet without knowing. I took the bait because you’ve done that a few times. But regardless, your little exercise proved that Bishop is not bright enough to actually fact check something and he has no place to tell anyone they just accept things because of bias. No matter how much cover you want to do, these are the facts.

No, the point is you are quick to point out a fake tweet except when it comes from your team. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[TorontoGold]

No, the point is you are quick to point out a fake tweet except when it comes from your team. Nothing more, nothing less.

Is that not what you’re doing right now? You never call Bishop out for his inability to decipher what’s real or not, and now you’re trying to call me inconsistent? L o l.

I already said Cal posted the tweet and it said LMAO as if it was satire. I didn’t think he actually believed it.

You can continue to litigate my standards and call out my inconsistencies but you should maybe take care of the buffoon on your side.

 

[GATTACA!]

Trump threatens to ‘blow up’ all water desalination plants in Iran

Legal expert says targeting civilian sites would be 'collective punishment', which is prohibited under laws of war.

www.aljazeera.com

War is going well. Very cool.

 

[NDVirginia19]

President Trump says he has 'no problem' with allowing oil into Cuba

Trump told reporters he would allow a Russian oil tanker to resupply Cuba, which suffers an energy crisis after the U.S. halt of Venezuelan supplies.

www.usatoday.com

TACO

I feel like you’ve gotta be pretty fucking dumb to be saying TACO given the past three months of foreign policy

 

[IrishinSyria]

I feel like you’ve gotta be pretty fucking dumb to be saying TACO given the past three months of foreign policy

TACO (unless trump accidentally starts a war that he can't get out of in which case he'll slowly escalate while practically begging on social media for a deal that lets him claim victory)

 

[drayer54]

So what’s Trump doing by easing Iranian oil sanctions to the tune of $14B?

Providing cash and sanctions relief to a terrorist regime we’re currently at war with?

4D chess…

I challenge you to start getting your news and analysis from a source other than X/social media.

My guess is gaining access to oil already on ships, injecting a supply shock from oil previously almost exclusively bound to China, create a temporary supply that can be used elsewhere and hopefully keep the price down while fighting the Iranians. The WTI v Brent spread is up for a reason. It's a calculated risk for a supply shock. They've clearly been trying to managing the price during this operation.

A ton of cash isn't going to do anything for them in the coming weeks. The downside is that it is a ton of cash. The difference is that we are not handing them a ton of cash, a forward path to enrichment, and years of oil sales ahead. Instead we are handing them a ton of cash, no navy, no Air Force, a lot burn up buildings, and a shattered infrastructure with a new regime. Seems like we are back and forth on Kharg, back and forth on seizing oil, etc. I share more stories from X because it is forum friendly. I spend more time on WSJ, but it is on a paywall for most folks here. Also, lots of stuff that isn't dem friendly can't be found in WaPo or NYT.

 

[NDVirginia19]

TACO (unless trump accidentally starts a war that he can't get out of in which case he'll slowly escalate while practically begging on social media for a deal that lets him claim victory)

There was nothing accidental about this.

Trying to swiftly achieve victory and negotiate a peace after a shock and awe bombing campaign is not chickening out. Pretending this has not been an incredibly successful military campaign is also retarded

 

[GATTACA!]

I feel like you’ve gotta be pretty fucking dumb to be saying TACO given the past three months of foreign policy

He literally chickened out. Says he’s going to have the honor of taking Cuba and now a week or however long it’s been he’s already backing down. What else would you call it?

 

[NDVirginia19]

He literally chickened out. Says he’s going to have the honor of taking Cuba and now a week or however long it’s been he’s already backing down. What else would you call it?

Considering the past 5 years of how he has handled the presidency, this is just how he negotiates. He has like a 50% hit rate of actually following through on his threats. Maybe see what happens with Cuba before we call it a ball or a strike.

 

[IrishinSyria]

There was nothing accidental about this.

Trying to swiftly achieve victory and negotiate a peace after a shock and awe bombing campaign is not chickening out. Pretending this has not been an incredibly successful military campaign is also retarded

Like eight million people wrote the same shit about the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan. For a superpower like the US, the question isn’t whether we can wreck shit in another country. Of course we can. The question is whether we can apply military force to achieve the outcomes we want without incurring disproportionate costs. Right now, that’s super unclear.

The downstream effects of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz are just starting to hit. We’ve proven utterly unable to protect key infrastructure in the Gulf. The Iranian regime seems more entrenched than it was before the war started. And there’s tons of highly refined uranium that we can’t destroy with air power, so we’re now publicly weighing a ground invasion that would probably require air lifting troops hundreds of miles inland and conducting a week + long operation to seize it in extremely hostile territory. If we don’t do that, we run the risk of the material going missing if the regime collapses, and then we have to deal with the economic and humanitarian costs of an Iranian civil war.

Excuse me if I’m not wrapping myself up in the mission accomplished banner just yet. You probably have some blank Velcro on your sleeve but I’ve seen what happens after we “win.”

 

[IrishinSyria]

My guess is gaining access to oil already on ships, injecting a supply shock from oil previously almost exclusively bound to China, create a temporary supply that can be used elsewhere and hopefully keep the price down while fighting the Iranians. The WTI v Brent spread is up for a reason. It's a calculated risk for a supply shock. They've clearly been trying to managing the price during this operation.

A ton of cash isn't going to do anything for them in the coming weeks. The downside is that it is a ton of cash. The difference is that we are not handing them a ton of cash, a forward path to enrichment, and years of oil sales ahead. Instead we are handing them a ton of cash, no navy, no Air Force, a lot burn up buildings, and a shattered infrastructure with a new regime. Seems like we are back and forth on Kharg, back and forth on seizing oil, etc. I share more stories from X because it is forum friendly. I spend more time on WSJ, but it is on a paywall for most folks here. Also, lots of stuff that isn't dem friendly can't be found in WaPo or NYT.

The “supply shock” theory makes no sense unless you can block the Chinese from getting the oil anyway. It may make it more expensive for them but it’s not like that demand is going to disappear.

 

[NDVirginia19]

Like eight million people wrote the same shit about the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan. For a superpower like the US, the question isn’t whether we can wreck shit in another country. Of course we can. The question is whether we can apply military force to achieve the outcomes we want without incurring disproportionate costs. Right now, that’s super unclear.

The downstream effects of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz are just starting to hit. We’ve proven utterly unable to protect key infrastructure in the Gulf. The Iranian regime seems more entrenched than it was before the war started. And there’s tons of highly refined uranium that we can’t destroy with air power, so we’re now publicly weighing a ground invasion that would probably require air lifting troops hundreds of miles inland and conducting a week + long operation to seize it in extremely hostile territory. If we don’t do that, we run the risk of the material going missing if the regime collapses, and then we have to deal with the economic and humanitarian costs of an Iranian civil war.

Excuse me if I’m not wrapping myself up in the mission accomplished banner just yet. You probably have some blank Velcro on your sleeve but I’ve seen what happens after we “win.”

No blank velcro on my sleeve, but we do things differently in the Navy.

I think it is a bit simplistic to assert that "We've proven utterly unable to protect key infrastructure in the Gulf". Iran's striking potency has greatly diminished, and they have virtually no means of replenishing their BM supply.

It is impossible to know how entrenched the Iranian regime truly is, when all we are publicly seeing is either A) US Propaganda and B) Iranian Propaganda. The public information is completely compromised, so you have to ask yourself whose propaganda is closer to the ground truth. Completely understand the comparison to Iraq, but I think they are completely different scenarios (with the exception of both occurring in the Middle East).

 

[Irish#1]

Is that not what you’re doing right now? You never call Bishop out for his inability to decipher what’s real or not, and now you’re trying to call me inconsistent? L o l.

I already said Cal posted the tweet and it said LMAO as if it was satire. I didn’t think he actually believed it.

You can continue to litigate my standards and call out my inconsistencies but you should maybe take care of the buffoon on your side.

Did I call out Warrior or Cal?

 

[Irish#1]

No blank velcro on my sleeve, but we do things differently in the Navy.

I think it is a bit simplistic to assert that "We've proven utterly unable to protect key infrastructure in the Gulf". Iran's striking potency has greatly diminished, and they have virtually no means of replenishing their BM supply.

It is impossible to know how entrenched the Iranian regime truly is, when all we are publicly seeing is either A) US Propaganda and B) Iranian Propaganda. The public information is completely compromised, so you have to ask yourself whose propaganda is closer to the ground truth. Completely understand the comparison to Iraq, but I think they are completely different scenarios (with the exception of both occurring in the Middle East).

If this were a Dem POTUS I have a feeling patience would be the advice, but since it’s orange man immediate gratification is required.

 

[drayer54]

If this were a Dem POTUS I have a feeling patience would be the advice, but since it’s orange man immediate gratification is required.

The dem talking points are incredibly weak, so that tells me he is doing ok.

 

[Bantry19]

Oh, so you’re not seeing enough X posts contradicting your devout MAGAism?

 

[TorontoGold]

Did I call out Warrior or Cal?

What? Stay on topic here, you are calling me a hypocrite because I didn’t call out Cal for his post. His post to me seemed to be satire. As evidenced by people from both sides laugh reacting to it.

So, when I’m calling you a hypocrite because you litigate me to death and let Bishop post the dumbest fake tweets without a peep. He’s an embarrassment, and you’re defending him because I didn’t reply to Cal’s post in time lmao.

 

[drayer54]

Oh, so you’re not seeing enough X posts contradicting your devout MAGAism?

I’m talking about the consistent line of bullshit from dem senators and congressman who all magically think the same and use identical talking points, except for Fetterman.

 

[IrishinSyria]

No blank velcro on my sleeve, but we do things differently in the Navy.

I think it is a bit simplistic to assert that "We've proven utterly unable to protect key infrastructure in the Gulf". Iran's striking potency has greatly diminished, and they have virtually no means of replenishing their BM supply.

It is impossible to know how entrenched the Iranian regime truly is, when all we are publicly seeing is either A) US Propaganda and B) Iranian Propaganda. The public information is completely compromised, so you have to ask yourself whose propaganda is closer to the ground truth. Completely understand the comparison to Iraq, but I think they are completely different scenarios (with the exception of both occurring in the Middle East).

Yeah, I guess at this point I’m just a guy who likes to monitor the situation and don’t love what I’m seeing, but there’s a lot I don’t and can’t know so a lot of one’s reactions to the war are going to be driven by how much you trust the people calling the shots and, well, let’s just say I don’t.

With respect to Iraq vs Iran, I agree they’re not the same but I think they’re not the same in ways that are almost worse across the board for what we’re trying to do-the Iranian regime is more deeply entrenched (by which I mean it was built with a lot more redundancy and dispersed decision making power through, e.g., the separate command structures of the Basij and the IRGC, agree it’s close to impossible to know where things stand now except that apparently someone is able to coordinate clearance with ships they’re letting pass through the Strait) which, unless I’m missing something, means it’s both less likely to break but more likely to break bad if it does collapse. If you thought de-baathification was bad, just wait until you have rogue elements of the IRGC fighting to maintain their stranglehold over ≈ 60% of Iran’s economy.

I would love to be wrong about all of this. While the US and it’s Allies have plenty of blood on their hands, I do believe the Islamic Republic has been (mostly) a blight on the region and on the people of Iran and that if we could somehow uproot and replace it with a functioning state that was less focused on projecting power and more focused on advancing the interests of its own people it would be a major turning point in the modern Middle East. I just think that’s a dangerous pipe dream.

 

[Irish#1]

What? Stay on topic here, you are calling me a hypocrite because I didn’t call out Cal for his post. His post to me seemed to be satire. As evidenced by people from both sides laugh reacting to it.

So, when I’m calling you a hypocrite because you litigate me to death and let Bishop post the dumbest fake tweets without a peep. He’s an embarrassment, and you’re defending him because I didn’t reply to Cal’s post in time lmao.

You really don't get any of this. Go back and reread. It was you that went off topic. Allow me to clarify.

A) You ever consider that some of those laughing emojis on Cal's post were because they are laughing that the tweet was fake and not laughing because it was satire?

B) I post about you not pointing out Cal's post was fake and you tell us Bishop does it all the time.

C) I repeat my point and you once again want to drive the conversation to Bishop pointing out he also fell for the fake tweet I posted.

D) My point was simply you haven't criticized Cal or Warrior for their fake tweets. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[TorontoGold]

You really don't get any of this. Go back and reread. It was you that went off topic. Allow me to clarify.

A) You ever consider that some of those laughing emojis on Cal's post were because they are laughing that the tweet was fake and not laughing because it was satire?

B) I post about you not pointing out Cal's post was fake and you tell us Bishop does it all the time.

C) I repeat my point and you once again want to drive the conversation to Bishop pointing out he also fell for the fake tweet I posted.

D) My point was simply you haven't criticized Cal or Warrior for their fake tweets. Nothing more, nothing less.

Oh it’s quite clear, you are trying to hold me to a higher standard than you hold yourself. Cal and Warrior never try to admonish others for not being a man to own up to getting duped. They admitted they were wrong, and yet you still want to see me jump in.

Why don’t you follow your own expectations for me? What’s the reason behind not calling Bishop out?

 

[Fbolt]

 

[Bishop2b5]

How do you take this sort of stuff or people like this seriously? This isn't political debate. It's not adults being adults. This is exactly the sort of childish, goofy, stupid stuff we used to do in 5th grade. This is so silly and immature that I thought it was fake until I Googled it and confirmed it's real. This is a child having a tantrum, not an intelligent adult criticizing someone's politics.