Ah contrair, mon amie - he's very much mine too! Thus, my visceral - and vociferous - critical reactions to him. But you mistake my rhetorical emphasis for disavowal when really I'm just trying to keep front & center that it's (MAGA-supporters like) you who claim tRUMP (so much more than the majority of Americans - me included) enough to defend his indefensible conduct. Yeah I claim him as "my president", Tiff, and accept my duty, in solidarity with my fellow citizens, to resist (i.e. civilly disobey) tRUMP's pathological perfidy & various abuses of power in the near-term and hold him criminally, constitutionally & electorally accountable in the long-term. So yeah, "my president", my national disgrace, My Cosmopolitan Duty to take out the presidental trash! Care to join me, chère? :flower: — 180 Proof
this neo-fascist, pocket proto-mini-Hitler. — tim wood
added that Soleimani and his Quds Force “were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more.” — ArguingWAristotleTiff
I think Trump derangement syndrome infects both sides though, not just his opponents. — DingoJones
Some of the Trump agenda is standard for a Republican president. — tim wood
Derangement implies error in both fact and degree. — tim wood
Again I refer you (@ArguingWAristotleTiff) to my question (b) from a prior thread. GOP - otherwise loyal tRUMPkins - Senator Lee, R-UT & Senator Paul, R-KY (so far) seemed to have answered. Nakedly shameful wreckless disregard for U.S. national security by your president, Tiff (et al). Is this shitshow what you 'voted' for? :roll:What I found so distressing about that briefing was that one of the messages we received from the briefers was, 'Do not debate. Do not discuss the issue of the appropriateness of further military intervention against Iran. And then if you do, you'll be emboldening Iran'.
The implication [from the briefers] being that we would somehow be making America less safe by having a debate or a discussion about the appropriateness of further military involvement against the government of Iran. Now, I find this insulting and demeaning, not personally, but to the office that each of the 100 senators in this building happens to hold.
It is not acceptable for officials within the executive branch of government — I don’t care whether they’re with the CIA, with the Department of Defense or otherwise — to come in and tell us that we can’t debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran. It’s un-American. It’s unconstitutional, and it’s wrong. — Sen. Mike Lee, R-UT
Thanks for you sketch, Tim. It just shows how the whole political discourse has evolved. And I think of Trump's antics will be taken by the Party even when he leaves.It's long been my belief that real Republicans constitutes a wing of the Democrat Party, perhaps not even identifying themselves as Republican. — tim wood
Perhaps someone has that position, but it seems like an extreme one. IOW one can be critical of the recent choices made without remotely assuming anything like this. Administrations can pressure a non-unified military to take certain steps, steps which than lead to situations where it becomes much harder to take a step back. The military can also consider itself NOT a policy maker, but rather the one who carries out the policies of administrations or Congress (remember when they used to be the ones who declared wars?). And so their intelligence is aimed at carrying out policy, which is seems, in this case, they managed extremely well, killing the target. And while they also killed others, including Iraquis, these people were fine targets and within the policy.What is more likely? All the representatives of government, the military and all that advises them are complete morons who want to destroy the USA. — Tzeentch
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.