-
ICMag with help from Phlizon, Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest for Christmas! You can check it here. Prizes are: full spectrum led light, seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
2024 US Presidential Election
- Status
They are either 'technicians' or live bait.
You probably remember that the CIA and more negative, clandestine sides of USAID were in SE Asia long before the US Gov acknowledged they were sending 'advisors.'
I wondered about the reasons for the units to be staffed by US Troops. Do they not trust IDF with the tech or the tools? (I wouldn't). Too little training time considering the accuracy of the incoming? Other issues?
Either way, yep, as soon as a US GI, sent there on an illegal assignment, takes a hit, then it'll be game on.
when given two "war criminals" up for an election, and ONE of them is going to win, i hold my nose and vote for the one not promising to become a dictator and refusing to admit losing an election. you do what you want, Pontius...
There had been zero ruling by the ICJ when Trump was sending weapons and money to Israel. Therefore, while he knowingly was arming them to do what they were doing, the technicality of it is that Donnie was not arming a war criminal.
Joe and Kamala can't claim the same. The ICJ ruled on the status of Israel and Israel's actions DURING Biden's term, and Joe and Kamala (now) continued sending weapons.
Once the ICJ ruled that Israel was WAY out of bounds, all shipments of arms and military aid should've, by law, ceased. It didn't.
These are legal facts.
Regardless of legality, the USA will always aid and arm Israel.
No matter who's president.
It's funny... but I could swear that I was just witness to the argument that Israel was way out of line before some ICJ ruling...
No matter who's president.
It's funny... but I could swear that I was just witness to the argument that Israel was way out of line before some ICJ ruling...
I can understand that the technical difference between a conviction and no conviction is lost on some... But that's the technical difference.
Some people just aren't very astute when it comes to technicalities... or definitions.
Maybe someday the implications of such will sink in. Maybe.
Some people just aren't very astute when it comes to technicalities... or definitions.
Maybe someday the implications of such will sink in. Maybe.
Or maybe the implication of an arbitration will seem hollow when compared to the implication of an ethical aberration.
Trump is attempting yet another fascist takeover.
I would think that an attempt to stop him from burning the Constitution supercedes a moral obligation to allow him power.
Trump is attempting yet another fascist takeover.
I would think that an attempt to stop him from burning the Constitution supercedes a moral obligation to allow him power.
One of the problems with some peoples' neurotic fears is that those possessing those unbearable and likely exaggerated fears often expect others to share in their neuroses.
"Just say "NO".
"Just say "NO".
Partisan to the gills and then some, but interesting between the lines.
I bet Mr. Trump is angry this morning.
I bet Mr. Trump is angry this morning.
Yep, group think partisans often have difficulty carrying their own water for their policy failures, whether moral, legal, social, or political.
"But how could anyone turn their backs on us at a time like THIS??!!" said those who didn't bat an eye at genocide.
Edit: But I personally have zero plans for being fitted with chains. Long history of a scorched earth policy; trade my body for at least 4 of theirs, and we're square.
Last edited:
hehe
a normal thinking adult WOULD see it like that. i don't SEE any "moral obligation" to returning a multiple indicted/multiple convicted felon to power myself... that would require mental gymnastics far beyond the capabilities of an Einstein.
- Status
