|
Night10194 posted:Gotta get the sacred dagger hidden in St. Peter's Basilica for that. Secretly Hillary knows that McConnell will burst into flames once he touches it.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:15 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:32 |
|
A Winner is Jew posted:So she's to blame for what happens over a year after she leaves her position as SoS... got it. When what happens is a direct result of an inadequately-planned operation that she helped champion, yeah, I do. Do you not blame Iraq on Bush and Rumsfeld? They left office eight and ten years ago, respectively. Yinlock posted:CNN in particular has been fellating Trump non-stop. I dunno, I've seen people like Anderson Cooper and Jeff Tapper calling Trump surrogates out pretty clearly. Even if they didn't, though, Benghazi just isn't that much of a story for them anymore. DemeaninDemon posted:Secretly Hillary knows that McConnell will burst into flames once he touches it. I'd think turtles are kind of hard to set on fire...
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:16 |
|
The original intervention was pushed primarily by France looking to avoid a refugee situation similar to what had been going on with refugees from 2007 on
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:16 |
|
CNN has been having a ton of fun with chyrons which is pretty un-CNN like. No one's fellating Trump, they're just trying to go equally hard on both candidates which is unfair given the facts, their qualifications and personal pasts.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:20 |
|
That counts as a sloppy blowjob since Trump's such a rotten, cheetoy piece of poo poo.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:21 |
|
Majorian posted:That does make me pretty mad too, tbh. I've been watching old SNL reruns, and it's amazing how much "Donald Trump" was a byword for "the literal shittiest person on Earth" through so many sketches. And yet we seem to have forgotten that. I guess part of the reason why it works for him is because so many of us already expected him to be awful, so no one was surprised at the crazy poo poo he was saying. putting aside the fact that a mainstream source allowing a crazy rear end in a top hat like Rudy to rant about benghazi absolutely does count as mainstream talking about it, multiple stories this past weekish have been about if Hillary's new released emails 'shed light on Benghazi' (they don't because there's nothing to shed light on) as if there was still some grand plot to find out about, and a good few of them ended with some big 'well nothing in THIS batch but I bet the NEXT one will have some sweet benghazi info'
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:21 |
|
straight up brolic posted:There are plenty of people in the electorate who are not stupid that the emails, Benghazi, and the Clinton Foundation represent real concerns for. If you say so, but again, if it's not swaying their votes it literally doesn't matter.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:21 |
|
straight up brolic posted:CNN has been having a ton of fun with chyrons which is pretty un-CNN like. No one's fellating Trump, they're just trying to go equally hard on both candidates which is unfair given the facts, their qualifications and personal pasts. When was the last time CNN brought up Trump's past refusal to rent to black people when discussing his outreach attempts? I think calling a candidate out when they lie isn't the same as constantly repeating lies about a candidate but in the form of a question.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:22 |
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:If you say so, but again, if it's not swaying their votes it literally doesn't matter.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:23 |
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:putting aside the fact that a mainstream source allowing a crazy rear end in a top hat like Rudy to rant about benghazi absolutely does count as mainstream talking about it, But even he isn't really ranting about it on mainstream news channels. He'll bring it up occasionally, but won't pursue the point. quote:multiple stories this past weekish have been about if Hillary's new released emails 'shed light on Benghazi' (they don't because there's nothing to shed light on) as if there was still some grand plot to find out about, and a good few of them ended with some big 'well nothing in THIS batch but I bet the NEXT one will have some sweet benghazi info' The only one I've seen so far is the CNN one, which is, "Hey, those idiots at Judicial Watch sued to look at the emails, and it turns out there's only one about Benghazi, and it's a letter of congratulations after the Senate hearing." But look, even if you don't agree with me that it's largely disappeared from mainstream news sources, can you at least admit that it's considerably less of a story than it was?
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:23 |
|
straight up brolic posted:CNN has been having a ton of fun with chyrons which is pretty un-CNN like. No one's fellating Trump, they're just trying to go equally hard on both candidates which is unfair given the facts, their qualifications and personal pasts. *Interviews a white nationalist on air* *scratches chin* *Asks the panel of shills to compare this to coughing *
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:25 |
|
Majorian posted:But even he isn't really ranting about it on mainstream news channels. He'll bring it up occasionally, but won't pursue the point. The fact it brings it up at all still promotes the falsehoods. Also the mainstream media covers the (c) poo poo without correcting Trump.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:25 |
|
straight up brolic posted:*looks at polls where Clinton's lead has evaporated after a month of intense scrutiny into these very issues because her voters are dropping out* Hahaha yeah that's what's happening. But let's play. In the universe where that's true, what's goatee-Hillary supposed to do about it?
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:25 |
|
Spun Dog posted:*Interviews a white nationalist on air*
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:26 |
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Hahaha yeah that's what's happening. But let's play. In the universe where that's true, what's goatee-Hillary supposed to do about it?
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:26 |
|
OhFunny posted:Darren Seals. 29-Year-Old Protest Leader Found Shot Dead in Burning Car in St. Louis. Why did Hillary Clinton have him killed? Seems weird.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:27 |
|
straight up brolic posted:okay tell me what's happening then? Lol No no, you're the author of this sci-fi masterwork, write the next scene.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:28 |
|
Majorian posted:When what happens is a direct result of an inadequately-planned operation that she helped champion, yeah, I do. Do you not blame Iraq on Bush and Rumsfeld? They left office eight and ten years ago, respectively. Jesus gently caress you're dumb. Iraq went to poo poo while Bush and Rumsfeld were at the wheel. Libya was relatively stable given they just went through a civil war when Clinton stepped down and didn't go to poo poo until over a year later. The better analogy would be blaming Bill for 9/11.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:29 |
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Hahaha yeah that's what's happening. But let's play. In the universe where that's true, what's goatee-Hillary supposed to do about it? It is kind of happening, actually. Trump's numbers aren't rising, but Clinton's have dipped over the past couple weeks. It's infuriating, but it's true.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:32 |
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You guys are really going to hate when she wins and it turns out she intends to be the president of the whole country and not just the cool kids club. She's going to take meetings with Republicans and work together with them on things. The last eight years has made last bit pretty hard to swallow. Republicans working with anyone is against all the stand for.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:33 |
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:No no, you're the author of this sci-fi masterwork, write the next scene.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:33 |
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Jesus gently caress you're dumb. Actually, Iraq was relatively quiet for several months after the initial invasion. Posters in this very forum were bullish about the country's chances of holding free and fair elections that would turn it into a bastion of democracy. Neocon goons posted photos of Iraqi women with purple smudges on their thumbs, indicating that they had voted. Things only got noticeably worse when it turned out that the rift between Sunni and Shia Iraqs was wider than Bush understood. In both cases, the initial invasion went swimmingly. It was winning the peace that neither administration had prepared for. But please, continue to tell me how I'm dumb, when you clearly know very little about this topic.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:35 |
|
Majorian posted:Actually, Iraq was relatively quiet for several months after the initial invasion. Posters in this very forum were bullish about the country's chances of holding free and fair elections that would turn it into a bastion of democracy. Neocon goons posted photos of Iraqi women with purple smudges on their thumbs, indicating that they had voted. Things only got noticeably worse when it turned out that the rift between Sunni and Shia Iraqs was wider than Bush understood. In both cases, the initial invasion went swimmingly. It was winning the peace that neither administration had prepared for. Well, if your post invasion strategy is to let a country descend into violent lawless anarchy then it seems like the invasion didn't really go well at all, unless the point was to have the country descend into violent lawless anarchy. This is like saying "The surgery went very well! Also, the patient died."
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:42 |
|
straight up brolic posted:*looks at polls where Clinton's lead has evaporated after a month of intense scrutiny into these very issues because her voters are dropping out* You were saying?
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:43 |
|
NippleFloss posted:Well, if your post invasion strategy is to let a country descend into violent lawless anarchy then it seems like the invasion didn't really go well at all, unless the point was to have the country descend into violent lawless anarchy. This is like saying "The surgery went very well! Also, the patient died." Which is precisely my point. From a narrow military standpoint, it was a success. From a broader political standpoint, it was not. It's still an overall decline in her numbers, though. It probably won't cost her the election, but it's something her team needs to take seriously. They can't just coast into November. Majorian fucked around with this message at 23:46 on Sep 7, 2016 |
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:43 |
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You guys are really going to hate when she wins and it turns out she intends to be the president of the whole country and not just the cool kids club. She's going to take meetings with Republicans and work together with them on things. I don't mind working with Republicans as long as they don't actually get anything they want, because everything they want is toxic and dangerous, or just about. I'd rather they kept doing nothing than pass almost anything in the Republican Party platform, even for concessions. Thankfully the Republicans are too stupid and corrupt to work with anyone anymore if they don't get 100% of what they want, so we're safe in that regard.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:48 |
|
People's insistence in here on saying "she's going to win" when someone makes a tangential point (in my case that people care about the scandals) is so maddening. Yeah, I agree. I'm a Hillary voter and think she's in a strong position, but her lead has shrunk from 7 to ~2 points on RCP average in the past month because American voters care about this poo poo along with other reasons.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:48 |
|
Majorian posted:Which is precisely my point. From a narrow military standpoint, it was a success. From a broader political standpoint, it was not. It was not successful by any measure. We got to Baghdad really quickly...so what? All that did was precipitate supply chain and manpower problems and lead to the eventual chaos. Unless the military goal was to get bogged down in the longest and bloodiest conflict in two generations I'm not sure how it could be a success. Your viewpoint must be REALLY narrow.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:51 |
|
Majorian posted:Actually, Iraq was relatively quiet for several months after the initial invasion. Posters in this very forum were bullish about the country's chances of holding free and fair elections that would turn it into a bastion of democracy. Neocon goons posted photos of Iraqi women with purple smudges on their thumbs, indicating that they had voted. Things only got noticeably worse when it turned out that the rift between Sunni and Shia Iraqs was wider than Bush understood. In both cases, the initial invasion went swimmingly. It was winning the peace that neither administration had prepared for. If by several months you mean less than two. May was the infamous "mission accomplished" photo. June was the start of the insurgency, or does the US launching the first of many counterinsurgency missions not count? vvv that will never not be funny / tragic vvv A Winner is Jew fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Sep 7, 2016 |
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:53 |
|
A Winner is Jew posted:If by several months you mean less than two. grover on March 18th, 2003 posted:How long will it take to capture Baghdad? 2 days
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:54 |
|
Josef bugman posted:No, but backing them seems like a bad policy. C.f. Saudi Arabia and the amount of arms deals they get. Spoken like a man who has never studied international law, and entirely fails to realize the principles that underlie it.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:56 |
|
Lol grover
|
# ? Sep 7, 2016 23:57 |
|
NippleFloss posted:It was not successful by any measure. We got to Baghdad really quickly...so what? All that did was precipitate supply chain and manpower problems and lead to the eventual chaos. Unless the military goal was to get bogged down in the longest and bloodiest conflict in two generations I'm not sure how it could be a success. Your viewpoint must be REALLY narrow. I'm not sure why you're arguing with me here; I'm not claiming that the overall mission was a success. A Winner is Jew posted:If by several months you mean less than two. There was limited violence in the months immediately following the first Libyan Civil War too, actually. The point is, your claim that Clinton was in no ways responsible for the violence that took place after 2012 is ludicrous.
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:00 |
|
Also even that post was from before the invasion was even launched
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:00 |
|
i mean yeah posts like that in the context of today show how spectacularly wrong those attitudes were in hindsight, and while that grover post is an extreme lowball, the rest of the thread is pretty typical of that attitudes of the time. remember that we were still in the post-9/11 "america needs revenge" mentality, and the only real war in living memory was the first gulf war, which was very widely seen as a success and had cultivated an attitude of "america can do no wrong" on the right.
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:02 |
|
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:05 |
|
Oh great, Trump supports ABMs.
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:06 |
This day in history, USPOL 2012:"I can't explain love." - Mitt RomneyArzy posted:Jobs report whiffs hard! Misses by a ton. ascii genitals posted:Jesus christ Arzy. Hieronymous Alloy posted:How are you supposed to call out politicians who are quite deliberately and consciously adopting Goebbel's "Big Lie" tactics, then? There's no other description for what Ryan and Romney are doing. Joementum posted:Clint Eastwood has granted his first media interview since the convention speech... to the Carmel Pine Cone. Obama posted:"Tax cuts, tax cuts, gut some regulations — oh, and more tax cuts. Tax cuts when times are good, tax cuts when times are bad. Tax cuts to help you lose a few extra pounds. Tax cuts to improve your love life. It will cure anything, according to them." Axetrain posted:Goddamn looking at that toxx list if Obama loses this forum will be some sort of post apocalyptic hellscape where only Arzy, Arkane, BoostedC5, and that other guy post. Joementum posted:Gary Johnson is not allowed to be on the ballot in Michigan. A judge has ruled that it would violate Michigan's "sore loser" law since Johnson ran in the Republican primary. However, all is not lost! Instead of running Gary Johnson (of New Mexico), the Libertarians may instead run Gary Johnson (of Austin, Texas) who was a delegate to the Libertarian convention and a former party official. And to round things out, everyone's favorite spokesperson for the "bash the hippies, gently caress hicks" crowd, SilentD, made an appearance deep in the night with some insightful words about how 90% of the country are lazy assholes. SilentD posted:Really, I doubt that. Correct me if I'm wrong but top 10% is just north of 100k for a household income, that's a joke. I used to clear that alone before moving to the non profit sector. Top 5% IIRC is just north of 150k per household, very easy with a dual income family. In case you were wondering, other than the jobs report that Arzy crowed about, it was a slow news day. It won't stay that way for long, though. Jazerus fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Sep 8, 2016 |
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:07 |
|
Oh man, its so simple, why didn't Obama just ask the generals how to defeat ISIS
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:11 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:32 |
|
Majorian posted:There was limited violence in the months immediately following the first Libyan Civil War too, actually. The point is, your claim that Clinton was in no ways responsible for the violence that took place after 2012 is ludicrous. Of course there was violence in the months after the fall of Qaddafi. Only an idiot would think that there would be total and immediate peace and security following a loving civil war. You assertion that the less than two months of relative peace in Iraq post "mission accomplished" is somehow even remotely close to the almost 30 months of relative peace between civil wars in Libya is laughable in every conceivable way, but hey, keep on comparing her to republicans, I'm sure this time you'll make it stick.
|
# ? Sep 8, 2016 00:11 |