Trump Warns of Unprecedented Global Conflict in RNC Speech

[Walker88]

17 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Can I have assume that you have no way of supporting that nonsense?

 

Another poster already posted a Pew Research poll to back it up.

 

Because of a former job, I know how Iraq came to be. It was 100% a Neocon fiasco.

 

The agency had believed there was maybe a 15% chance Saddam had WMD, and that number only because it is impossible to prove a negative. ALl of the claims came from one source. The source is what is called a "Walk In", which means someone who approaches intel officers voluntarily to tell them something he wants them to know. The agency named this Walk In "Curveball", which says what they really thought of him. The guy wanted money and resettlement somewhere. The agency kept him at arm's length.

 

Curveball then went to other embassies telling them the same story, hoping he might get money and resettlement from them.  Because US intel has liaison relationships with other nation's, the US recieved this reporting. The agency realized it was just Curveball. VP Cheney called the liaison reports "corroboration"{, even after he was told it was just Curveball again.

 

Cheney got then-DCI George Tenet to go along with the ruse of attacking Iraq. Tenet wanted DCI to be a Cabinet Level position, so he could be at the Big Boy's table in the West Wing.

 

Cheney then set up Gen Colin Powell to be the fallguy and fool. The UN speech claiming 'proof' of WMD was written. An analyst at the agency named Tyler Drumheller edited it to facts and the actual agency assessment. Cheney re-edicted it and told Tyler to get lost. Powell, unaware he was presenting lies to the UN, gave the speech Cheney intended.

 

The Neocons got their war.

 

The Neocons also were responsible for the 20 years in Afghanistan. After 9-11, the agency advised to take out the terrorist training camps, try to get ObL, and then go home. A few weeks at most. A couple of agency officers wrote a white paper predicting EXACTLY what would happen if the US entered into any greater involvement in Afghanistan. They said a war is unwinnable and the US would end up spending $trillions being bogged down, eventually either having to define 'victory' and then say we achieved it, or else just leave. The Taliban was always going to win. The white paper was ignored, and twenty useless years followed.

 

Again, it was Repubs and Neocons behind both disasters.

[nauseus]

16 hours ago, placeholder said:

And the passage of time has revealed the truth. Whereas a massive amount of money and time was devoted to trying to debunk the elections and the loons and liars came up with nothing.

 

How much money?

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Maybe he doesn't but I do.

"The original decision to use military force in Iraq, by contrast, remains contentious. While 48% say the United States made the right decision to use military force in Iraq, nearly as many (46%) disagree. And more than eight years after the war began, that decision continues to be politically divisive: 72% of Republicans support the decision to use force compared with just 44% of independents and 37% of Democrats."

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2011/11/17/section-4-views-of-iraq/?src=prc-number

 

That was not the issue but please continue rambling on in the background.

Edited July 22 by nauseus
there's an n in rambling.

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Walker88 said:

 

Another poster already posted a Pew Research poll to back it up.

 

Because of a former job, I know how Iraq came to be. It was 100% a Neocon fiasco.

 

The agency had believed there was maybe a 15% chance Saddam had WMD, and that number only because it is impossible to prove a negative. ALl of the claims came from one source. The source is what is called a "Walk In", which means someone who approaches intel officers voluntarily to tell them something he wants them to know. The agency named this Walk In "Curveball", which says what they really thought of him. The guy wanted money and resettlement somewhere. The agency kept him at arm's length.

 

Curveball then went to other embassies telling them the same story, hoping he might get money and resettlement from them.  Because US intel has liaison relationships with other nation's, the US recieved this reporting. The agency realized it was just Curveball. VP Cheney called the liaison reports "corroboration"{, even after he was told it was just Curveball again.

 

Cheney got then-DCI George Tenet to go along with the ruse of attacking Iraq. Tenet wanted DCI to be a Cabinet Level position, so he could be at the Big Boy's table in the West Wing.

 

Cheney then set up Gen Colin Powell to be the fallguy and fool. The UN speech claiming 'proof' of WMD was written. An analyst at the agency named Tyler Drumheller edited it to facts and the actual agency assessment. Cheney re-edicted it and told Tyler to get lost. Powell, unaware he was presenting lies to the UN, gave the speech Cheney intended.

 

The Neocons got their war.

 

The Neocons also were responsible for the 20 years in Afghanistan. After 9-11, the agency advised to take out the terrorist training camps, try to get ObL, and then go home. A few weeks at most. A couple of agency officers wrote a white paper predicting EXACTLY what would happen if the US entered into any greater involvement in Afghanistan. They said a war is unwinnable and the US would end up spending $trillions being bogged down, eventually either having to define 'victory' and then say we achieved it, or else just leave. The Taliban was always going to win. The white paper was ignored, and twenty useless years followed.

 

Again, it was Repubs and Neocons behind both disasters.

 

Great story but not the point. You might have a chat with Placeholder.

[metisdead]

Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

[candide]

11 hours ago, G_Money said:

Who’s talking to you?  Raise your white flag.

 

Just like Biden did.  Does he have French in his bloodline?

You wrote a deflection and then accuse someone else to deflect from your lame deflection. 🙂

[candide]

13 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

As I thought. Nonsense.

Absolutely not. Most Trump voters in that age range were already Republican at that time, and they were massively supporting the invasion of Irak.

[Yellowtail]

4 hours ago, placeholder said:

It's bizarre how those on the right claim to be defending the west's Judeo Christian heritage but clearly haven't a clue about what that entails.

Why not explain it oh wise one? 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

4 hours ago, Walker88 said:

 

Another poster already posted a Pew Research poll to back it up.

 

Because of a former job, I know how Iraq came to be. It was 100% a Neocon fiasco.

 

The agency had believed there was maybe a 15% chance Saddam had WMD, and that number only because it is impossible to prove a negative. ALl of the claims came from one source. The source is what is called a "Walk In", which means someone who approaches intel officers voluntarily to tell them something he wants them to know. The agency named this Walk In "Curveball", which says what they really thought of him. The guy wanted money and resettlement somewhere. The agency kept him at arm's length.

 

Curveball then went to other embassies telling them the same story, hoping he might get money and resettlement from them.  Because US intel has liaison relationships with other nation's, the US recieved this reporting. The agency realized it was just Curveball. VP Cheney called the liaison reports "corroboration"{, even after he was told it was just Curveball again.

 

Cheney got then-DCI George Tenet to go along with the ruse of attacking Iraq. Tenet wanted DCI to be a Cabinet Level position, so he could be at the Big Boy's table in the West Wing.

 

Cheney then set up Gen Colin Powell to be the fallguy and fool. The UN speech claiming 'proof' of WMD was written. An analyst at the agency named Tyler Drumheller edited it to facts and the actual agency assessment. Cheney re-edicted it and told Tyler to get lost. Powell, unaware he was presenting lies to the UN, gave the speech Cheney intended.

 

The Neocons got their war.

 

The Neocons also were responsible for the 20 years in Afghanistan. After 9-11, the agency advised to take out the terrorist training camps, try to get ObL, and then go home. A few weeks at most. A couple of agency officers wrote a white paper predicting EXACTLY what would happen if the US entered into any greater involvement in Afghanistan. They said a war is unwinnable and the US would end up spending $trillions being bogged down, eventually either having to define 'victory' and then say we achieved it, or else just leave. The Taliban was always going to win. The white paper was ignored, and twenty useless years followed.

 

Again, it was Repubs and Neocons behind both disasters.

Absolutely! Just like Viet Nam, none of the Democrats ever supported it, after it became unpopular. 

[illisdean]

RNC convention was a great event, Hulk Hogan was outstanding, not bad for a 70 year old.

 

Got the message out lound and clear for Trump: "Make America Great Again"

 

 

[G_Money]

8 hours ago, candide said:

You wrote a deflection and then accuse someone else to deflect from your lame deflection. 🙂

What are you babbling about now?

[candide]

On 7/20/2024 at 8:26 PM, candide said:

They didn't need his suggestions either.

 

The moron doesn't even know the difference between viruses and bacteria, and he thought he may be able make valuable suggestions! 😀

 

"Asked by a journalist about the level of testing for the coronavirus across the US, the president answered: “This is a very brilliant enemy. You know, it’s a brilliant enemy. They develop drugs like the antibiotics. You see it. Antibiotics used to solve every problem. Now one of the biggest problems the world has is the germ has gotten so brilliant that the antibiotic can’t keep up with it."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-antibiotics-coronavirus-white-house-briefing-brilliant-enemy-genius-idiot-a9460636.html

 

 

On 7/20/2024 at 9:08 PM, G_Money said:

That’s all you got?  Weak.

 

How’s that science working out for Biden?  Not too good for the human pin cushion.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, G_Money said:

What are you babbling about now?

Lol! You don't even remember what you posted!

"How’s that science working out for Biden?" was a lame deflection used by you as a reply to my post! 😀

[G_Money]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

 

 

Lol! You don't even remember what you posted!

"How’s that science working out for Biden?" was a lame deflection used by you as a reply to my post! 😀

No one else can answer.  Maybe you can.

 

Specifically, How did “Follow the Science” help Biden in his latest bout with the Chin- Virus?

 

 

[candide]

42 minutes ago, G_Money said:

No one else can answer.  Maybe you can.

 

Specifically, How did “Follow the Science” help Biden in his latest bout with the Chin- Virus?

 

 

Why should I reply to a deflection?

[G_Money]

1 hour ago, candide said:

Why should I reply to a deflection?

Ah yes!  Deflection.  
 

Your latest “go to” word when you have no legitimate reply.

 

 

 

 

[candide]

3 hours ago, G_Money said:

Ah yes!  Deflection.  
 

Your latest “go to” word when you have no legitimate reply.

 

 

 

 

It is what it is. 😀

[G_Money]

17 minutes ago, candide said:

It is what it is. 😀

lol .  Say it in repetition a few times and you’ll sound just like Kamala Harris.

[candide]

38 minutes ago, G_Money said:

lol .  Say it in repetition a few times and you’ll sound just like Kamala Harris.

You have tried it? It works? 😀

[stoner]

10 minutes ago, candide said:

49 minutes ago, G_Money said:

lol .  Say it in repetition a few times and you’ll sound just like Kamala Harris.

You have tried it? It works? 😀

 

all well and good.... but can the deflection be unburdened or undone ? 

[placeholder]

8 hours ago, G_Money said:

No one else can answer.  Maybe you can.

 

Specifically, How did “Follow the Science” help Biden in his latest bout with the Chin- Virus?

 

 

It's clear you don't understand the full range of the benefits of vaccines. Even if they don't protect someone from being symptomatic they can lessen the symptoms dramatically. As in the case of the much higher mortality rate from areas of the country that voted heavily republican where the locals were much more likely not to be vaccinated.

Or the fact that the flu virus also greatly ameliorates the symptoms of flu.

In other words, protection doesn't have to be total to be beneficial. 

 

[G_Money]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

It's clear you don't understand the full range of the benefits of vaccines. Even if they don't protect someone from being symptomatic they can lessen the symptoms dramatically. As in the case of the much higher mortality rate from areas of the country that voted heavily republican where the locals were much more likely not to be vaccinated.

Or the fact that the flu virus also greatly ameliorates the symptoms of flu.

In other words, protection doesn't have to be total to be beneficial. 

 

Wise words.  Too bad our resident scientists couldn’t answer.

[G_Money]

5 hours ago, candide said:

You have tried it? It works? 😀

Sorry but I don’t identify with Harris.

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, G_Money said:

Wise words.  Too bad our resident scientists couldn’t answer.

Trust you to make it personal when the facts are against you.

[Wrwest]

On 7/20/2024 at 10:41 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

You were doing so well there, till you let your dislike of Trump take over.

 

Given you don't know what will happen while he is president again, you must base your opinion on the last time. No started wars, a good economy, giving the boot up the jaxy to NATO countries unwilling to pay their fair share, an exit from Afghanistan planned, a reduction in illegals on the southern border isn't such a bad record.

I don't get what he did that causes such obsessive hatred.

Check again. I never have posted this. Not me.

[G_Money]

18 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Trust you to make it personal when the facts are against you.

Explain yourself.  
 

You provided a reasonable response unlike the resident scientists(p).

 

You don’t know me well but I give credit when credit is due.

 

Even Danderman knows this.

 

Nothing to do with being “facts against me”.

Edited July 23 by G_Money

[placeholder]

Just now, G_Money said:

Explain yourself.  
 

You provided a reasonable response unlike the resident scientists(p).

 

You don’t know me well but I give credit when credit is due.

 

Even Danderman knows this.

I'm not going to get into your track record  of making personal comments. The mods frown on that. The relevant point is that vaccines don't have to provide 100% immunity to be of great therapeutic value. 

[G_Money]

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I'm not going to get into your track record  of making personal comments. The mods frown on that. The relevant point is that vaccines don't have to provide 100% immunity to be of great therapeutic value. 

I believe you already mentioned that in your previous post.

 

And I gave credit where it was due.

 

Anything else?

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/22/2024 at 12:48 PM, Galong said:

Only I can save the world!  This is a textbook case of Messiah Complex.   His minions are too gullible to know they're boarding a ship bound for the destruction of the country... and beyond.  It's like Monty Python's "Life of Brian" being played out in real life.  "It's a sign from God!" ... "No it's not, it's a bloody shoe!"  ... "Follow the shoe!"

No doubt you have some excellent, well thought out reasons for believing that Trump will cause the destruction of the country, and beyond. I'd love to read them.

Going by the only example we have of him as POTUS, was one that was not destruction, and of course he didn't start any wars, so no destruction beyond then.

[thaibeachlovers]

31 minutes ago, Wrwest said:

Check again. I never have posted this. Not me.

Had you read the post directly below that one you would have seen that I already noted that it was a different poster that I was quoting.

[Eric Loh]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No doubt you have some excellent, well thought out reasons for believing that Trump will cause the destruction of the country, and beyond. I'd love to read them.

Going by the only example we have of him as POTUS, was one that was not destruction, and of course he didn't start any wars, so no destruction beyond then.

Add Biden, Obama, Clinton who didn't start a war. Bush (R) and Reagan (R) started wars in Irag and Granada respectively. You happy now.