The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[Dddrees]

This isn't about ideology. This is about owning your own words.

Its not about owning them because I do, it's about my intentions and desire to keep in check our leaders and your willingness not to see that as being necessary. Do wonder how you would wish Obama to communicate this too you however.

 

[Birds Away]

Its not about owning them because I do, it's about my intentions and desire to keep in check our leaders and your willingness not to see that as being necessary. Do wonder how you would wish Obama to communicate this too you however.

Not at all. He shouldn't have communicated as much as he did. We paid a high price for that.

 

[Dddrees]

Not at all. He shouldn't have communicated as much as he did. We paid a high price for that.

Here again I think there is a balance and now we have a President with strong man tendencies that I have absolutely no reason to trust. You may very well have experiences where you are willing to hand over more trust where I simply would never do based on what I have seen and experienced. Obama may very well have given more than he should and I can see that, but that doesn't mean the President we have now can't do better.

Oh, and by the way it appears we can get some of this elsewhere and his Administration may actually do so. Actually Mattis kind of spoke to this the day after. Something to the extent that troop strength for now won't change if I remember correctly. Trump often says or doesn't say things that others in his Administration will cover his shortcomings for him. So what do you say now? Do you think Mattis is actually a traitor if he does so or his actions aren't so tied to a false ideology Trump is held to by his base?

 

[KLB]

Its not about owning them because I do, it's about my intentions and desire to keep in check our leaders and your willingness not to see that as being necessary. Do wonder how you would wish Obama to communicate this too you however.

In what conflict have we announced details of our plans before we actually took action? Well, other than recent history in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I expect to be told where we are fighting, who we are fighting, and why we are fighting them.

After that I want the military command to do its best to destroy the enemy as quickly as possible with as little off of our troops as possible.

I can only hope that the reasons given for the conflict are worth the sacrifices those young soldiers will make.

 

[Birds Away]

Here again I think there is a balance and now we have a President with strong man tendencies that I have absolutely no reason to trust. You may very well have experiences where you are willing to hand over more trust where I simply would never do based on what I have seen and experienced. Obama may very well have given more than he should and I can see that, but that doesn't mean the President we have now can't do better.

Oh, and by the way it appears we can get some of this elsewhere and his Administration may actually do so. Actually Mattis kind of spoke to this the day after. Something to the extent that troop strength for now won't change if I remember correctly. Trump often says or doesn't say things that others in his Administration will cover his shortcomings for him. So what do you say now? Do you think Mattis is actually a traitor if he does so or his actions aren't so tied to a false ideology Trump is held to by his base?

Well, I didn't say Obama was a traitor. I certainly wouldn't say Mattis is one either. It is unwise to discuss strategy beyond generalities. As to troop strength, I would prefer it not be discussed, particularly planned changes, as that can effect the folks on the ground over there. If Secretary Mattis doesn't think that is an issue in this case then I would defer to his greater knowledge of the matter. He is a professional military person so I have a lot of confidence in his judgment. When politicians get involved with talking about this stuff they generally say more than they should. That goes for the current guy and the last guy as well.

 

[Dddrees]

In what conflict have we announced details of our plans before we actually took action? Well, other than recent history in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I expect to be told where we are fighting, who we are fighting, and why we are fighting them.

After that I want the military command to do its best to destroy the enemy as quickly as possible with as little off of our troops as possible.

I can only hope that the reasons given for the conflict are worth the sacrifices those young soldiers will make.

Me as well and that's my desire for knowing so we can hold our leaders in check. I'm not looking for details in the sense of time lines and time tables, places and dates. I am looking for for things such as over all concept of strategy and what he desires to accomplish and why. And yes I am looking for more information on how much do we plan on committing to this effort.

Sorry this pendulum doesn't seem to have a middle ground but I believe strongly there needs to be a balance to what we are told to preserve our democracy and what needs to be kept secret to defend it.

 

[Birds Away]

Me as well and that's my desire for knowing so we can hold our leaders in check. I'm not looking for details in the sense of time lines and time tables, places and dates. I am looking for for things such as over all concept of strategy and what he desires to accomplish and why. And yes I am looking for more information on how much do we plan on committing to this effort.

Sorry this pendulum doesn't seem to have a middle ground but I believe strongly there needs to be a balance to what we are told to preserve our democracy and what needs to be kept secret to defend it.

Our representatives in Congress should be the ones providing oversight. That's the way the system is designed. If we don't like how it works then we, if enough agree, replace those representatives.

 

[Dddrees]

Well, I didn't say Obama was a traitor. I certainly wouldn't say Mattis is one either. It is unwise to discuss strategy beyond generalities. As to troop strength, I would prefer it not be discussed, particularly planned changes, as that can effect the folks on the ground over there. If Secretary Mattis doesn't think that is an issue in this case then I would defer to his greater knowledge of the matter. He is a professional military person so I have a lot of confidence in his judgment. When politicians get involved with talking about this stuff they generally say more than they should. That goes for the current guy and the last guy as well.

Here again in my opinion this is where the leaders Trump chose show much more maturity and good judgement than he does. What concerns me most is that they are not in charge but he his. So he in effect gets the final say so and this isn't just about troop strength. This goes for a great majority of what he says. His Administration typically says a number of things that don't agree with him. You say you trust Mattis if he chooses to talk to troop strength but you have a problem with me wanting that information. This doesn't make sense to me. This by the way isn't a new anomaly and it was often mentioned with little or no affect to our troops or mission prior to Obama.

 

[Dddrees]

Our representatives in Congress should be the ones providing oversight. That's the way the system is designed. If we don't like how it works then we, if enough agree, replace those representatives.

And there have been and will continue to be more discussions as long as he's President. Nothing new as this has occurred as far back as I can remember. But his Presidency and these times are very unique so we'll just have to wait and see where this goes.

 

[Leadeye]

As the world moves into the 21st century I think the strategy on dealing with troublesome countries should change from focusing on the country's assets, military or otherwise, and more towards elimination of the leadership. Bombing airfields or factories sends the wrong message to the citizens, hitting where the leadership lives sends the right one.

 

[Dddrees]

As the world moves into the 21st century I think the strategy on dealing with troublesome countries should change from focusing on the country's assets, military or otherwise, and more towards elimination of the leadership. Bombing airfields or factories sends the wrong message to the citizens, hitting where the leadership lives sends the right one.

Unfortunately when you just remove leadership it often involves chaos and the chaos can often cause us problems. Or result in a leader much worse than what you started out with. In fact we have a long history of getting involved in doing just that. Doesn't always work out very well.

 

[Jludo]

As the world moves into the 21st century I think the strategy on dealing with troublesome countries should change from focusing on the country's assets, military or otherwise, and more towards elimination of the leadership. Bombing airfields or factories sends the wrong message to the citizens, hitting where the leadership lives sends the right one.

Do we not go for the leadership where we can? Something like isis or al qaeda theres always a next guy up.

 

[Dddrees]

President: We May Have To Shutdown Government If We Don't Get The Wall.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powe...f373b3977ee_story.html?utm_term=.5d2100ccfedf

 

[Trigger Time]

Well your certainly entrenched in your own little world. Don't get me wrong there are others in that world too, but it just so happens there are others that feel differently than you.

Really? Where are they? Because i don't see anyone except you. And frankly Birds is running circles around you and using your own words to prove you are just rambling and don't really know what you stand for and what you don't except for Trump is bad. That's it. That's all you keep repeating In every single topic you get into. I've heard about guys like you in the military. Corrupting the new generation with poison

 

[Trigger Time]

Here again I think there is a balance and now we have a President with strong man tendencies that I have absolutely no reason to trust. You may very well have experiences where you are willing to hand over more trust where I simply would never do based on what I have seen and experienced. Obama may very well have given more than he should and I can see that, but that doesn't mean the President we have now can't do better.

Oh, and by the way it appears we can get some of this elsewhere and his Administration may actually do so. Actually Mattis kind of spoke to this the day after. Something to the extent that troop strength for now won't change if I remember correctly. Trump often says or doesn't say things that others in his Administration will cover his shortcomings for him. So what do you say now? Do you think Mattis is actually a traitor if he does so or his actions aren't so tied to a false ideology Trump is held to by his base?

Wow man you've went off the farm.
Also, president Trump is already doing better than Obama.

 

[Dddrees]

Really? Where are they? Because i don't see anyone except you. And frankly Birds is running circles around you and using your own words to prove you are just rambling and don't really know what you stand for and what you don't except for Trump is bad. That's it. That's all you keep repeating In every single topic you get into. I've heard about guys like you in the military. Corrupting the new generation with poison

Really, I think Bird also said if Mattis decided to reslease troop strength that that would be Ok. But not when I ask for it. Hmm, I think that this was acceptable information prior to the Obama Administration such as it was under The Bush Administration says something to me.

 

[Dddrees]

Wow man you've went off the farm.
Also, president Trump is already doing better than Obama.

Yeah, I guess you failed to see his rally in Phoenix.

 

[Trigger Time]

Here again in my opinion this is where the leaders Trump chose show much more maturity and good judgement than he does. What concerns me most is that they are not in charge but he his. So he in effect gets the final say so and this isn't just about troop strength. This goes for a great majority of what he says. His Administration typically says a number of things that don't agree with him. You say you trust Mattis if he chooses to talk to troop strength but you have a problem with me wanting that information. This doesn't make sense to me. This by the way isn't a new anomaly and it was often mentioned with little or no affect to our troops or mission prior to Obama.

Well that's because the constitution have him that power

 

[Trigger Time]

Yeah, I guess you failed to see his rally in Phoenix.

What about Phoenix? Exactly what are your issues? Let's hear it

 

[Trigger Time]

Really, I think Bird also said if Mattis decided to reslease troop strength that that would be Ok. But not when I ask for it. Hmm, I think that this was acceptable information prior to the Obama Administration such as it was under The Bush Administration says something to me.

I don't even know what you are saying. Honestly man you are just beyond a rational discussion because you are so jaded and poisoned