Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

El Presidente Trump

1…242243245247248…276

Comments

  • #7322
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Are you saying they just made the video footage up? That is pushing it. It wouldn't be the first time the US has supplied Islamic terrorists with weapons.

    Your source is incredibly poor and low on information.
    Even that despot Erdogan has said the US coalition has backed ISIS. A Presidential candidate said the same thing recently. Arms supplies being found is no accident. 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qdf2WH4g9k

    2:40 mark in video. A congresswoman even saying it.


  • #7323
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,133 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    But you guys are making it out like Obama was the 1st US president to supply weapons to the 'wrong' side.

    US seems to be intent on arming pretty much everyone on the basis that whomever wins will then be their ally. They pump 6bn into Israel every year, a major touch point for many ME problems. They want regime change in Iraq so arm a group who then turns against them.

    If anything, it is W Bush who carries the majority of blame for this. It wasn't Obama or HC who created the clusterf***, and whilst it can easily be argued that Obama did little to help the situation, or even to exacerbate it, the blame must lie with the GOP party.

    Trump has already sided clearly with Israel, so already he is getting involved in the ME. Israel is clearly a major source of hatred towards the west from the ME who feel that Israel has been forced upon them and they have been treated unfairly as Israel is backed by the west, and particularly US, at every turn.

    I fail to see how Trump will solve anything when he has already painted his colours clearly in the Israeli camp


  • #7324
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Getting back on topic, since it's clear someone appears to be eager to deflect... ;)

    A whole bunch of Russian diplomats have just got kicked out of the US, with some of them publicly named for spying.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/29/politics/russia-sanctions-announced-by-white-house/index.html
    Obama also said in the statement announcing that the diplomats have been ordered to leave the country and that those individuals and their families were given 72 hours to leave the United States.

    "These actions follow repeated private and public warnings that we have issued to the Russian government, and are a necessary and appropriate response to efforts to harm US interests in violation of established international norms of behavior," Obama said in the statement.

    The US also separately sanctioned two Russian individuals, Evgeniy Mikhailovich Bogachev and Alexey Belan, for using cyber-enabled means to allegedly cause misappropriation of funds and personal identifying information. They've long been sought by the FBI.

    "What these individuals were doing were basically collecting intelligence. They were intelligence officers operating here and using these compounds, one in New York, one in Maryland, for intelligence collection purposes," [White House Homeland Security adviser Lisa] Monaco told CNN's Jake Tapper on "The Lead" Thursday. "And what we are saying today is, in response to and in order to impose consequences for the Russian government's increasing harassment and aggression toward our personnel in Moscow, and, of course, their malicious cyberactivities, interfering and an effort to interfere in our election process, we are imposing consequences."

    ...

    House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican, called the sanctions "overdue," adding that it is an "appropriate way to end eight years of failed policy with Russia."

    ...

    Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, two of Russia's fiercest critics in the US Senate, called for stronger sanctions against Russia.

    "The retaliatory measures announced by the Obama administration today are long overdue. But ultimately, they are a small price for Russia to pay for its brazen attack on American democracy. We intend to lead the effort in the new Congress to impose stronger sanctions on Russia," the two said in a joint statement.

    ...

    Director of National Intelligence James Clapper issued a statement on Thursday reiterating the agency's confidence that the Russian government was involved in the US hacking.

    "This activity by Russian intelligence services is part of a decade-long campaign of cyber-enabled operations directed at the US Government and its citizens," the statement read. "The US Government can confirm that the Russian government, including Russia's civilian and military intelligence services, conducted many of the activities generally described by a number of these security companies."


  • #7325
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    globalresearch is a conspiracy website, you're not doing your credibility (in so far you have any left) any good by using them as a source.

    The same website that posts conspiracy theories on how vaccines are bad, the US did 9/11, HAARP, FEMA camps,...
    That doesn't mean the US has never backed or created such groups, but the evidence that they are behind ISIS is non-existent.
    Guardian website not good enough? Presidential candidate not good enough congresswoman not good enough. New York times has even reported on it, the New York times, the same paper which backed Hillary.


  • #7326
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Even that despot Erdogan has said the US coalition has backed ISIS. A Presidential candidate said the same thing recently. Arms supplies being found is no accident. 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qdf2WH4g9k

    2:40 mark in video. A congresswoman even saying it.

    She clearly says that the US funds groups in Syria (which is true) who then may or may not work together with ISIS or AQ (which is also true). That's not the same as what you said earlier though, that the US is directly behind ISIS and funds them directly.


  • Advertisement
  • #7327
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    HellSquirrel wrote: »
    I wouldn't be surprised that the US has funded terrorist groups, some of which have ended up as part of Daesh. That's a little different to "Obama founded ISIS" (he signed "B. Obama, Muslim" on the insurance documentation, you know) though.

    America's foreign policy has been interfering for decades at this stage. I would not absolve the US from any involvement in the current absolute ****show that is the  Middle East at the moment. But to try and say that the Middle East was lovely shlovely until the Big Bad Barack came along is insanely reductive and absolutely mockworthy. He continued policies that had been coming with serious side-effects. Just like all of the ones before him. At this stage, I am unsure if isolationism will actually work out. The ****show has hit such epic proportions that the western world doesn't get to just turn its back and hope it goes away by itself by now.
    I personally didn't say Obama FOUNDED ISIS. I said America did and under Obama administration has been found to have US supplies in the hands of ISIS fighters who are fighting against the Assad regime.


  • #7328
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Go look at the pictures of the US supplied weapons taken by the Syrian government army. Obama has been supplying terrorists with weapons, people who have beheaded children. Shame on him.

    Shame on him?

    Seems you blame him personally here .


  • #7329
    HellSquirrel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,078 ✭✭✭HellSquirrel


    Oh dear, a bunch of GOP folk are supporting it.

    It would tie the Trumpets in knots if Trump was still even pretending to be a Republican.


  • #7330
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    America did found ISIS, funded ISIS, supplied them with weapons in the Syria Civil war, supported terrorists fighting Assad. America very much is responsible for ISIS, that is on Obama's watch. Go blame him, no one else.

    Also here.


  • #7331
    HellSquirrel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,078 ✭✭✭HellSquirrel


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    Shame on him?

    Seems you blame him personally here .

    Evidence, logic and history bears no influence on Ponyworld.


  • Advertisement
  • #7332
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Go look at the pictures of the US supplied weapons taken by the Syrian government army. Obama has been supplying terrorists with weapons, people who have beheaded children. Shame on him.

    Shame on him?

    Seems you blame him personally here .
    He is the commander in Chief of the most powerful nation on earth and army and he has overseen US weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists. It is his job to protect Americans from terrorism, not supply it with weapons. Regarding the claim that he hasn't directly done it, makes it even worse if you believe that.

    It means you don't have a clue who you are backing, understand the ideology of Islam or the culture in that region. The only group worth supplying with weaponry is the Kurds (at least they seem the best moderate Islamic group from what I can see) and yet they are oppressed and hated by Turkey, have no state to call home.


  • #7333
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    Also here.

    Yeah but Hillary Clinton.


  • #7334
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    HellSquirrel wrote: »
    Oh dear, a bunch of GOP folk are supporting it.

    It would tie the Trumpets in knots if Trump was still even pretending to be a Republican.
    It really does complicate things for when Trump's boss tells him to put them back in though after Jan 20th, doesn't it? He's going to be in an absolutely awful negotiating position, insomuch that even if he has the authority to put all 35 diplomats back in place himself, if he does so against the wishes of the Republican (as well as obviously Democratic) party, it's going to cripple him for a number of different issues that he would need support on.


  • #7335
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    America did found ISIS, funded ISIS, supplied them with weapons in the Syria Civil war, supported terrorists fighting Assad. America very much is responsible for ISIS, that is on Obama's watch. Go blame him, no one else.

    Also here.
    He is the President, of course Obama is at fault for US weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists. If he can't make the right decisions, then he shouldn't be President of the United States.


  • #7336
    HellSquirrel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,078 ✭✭✭HellSquirrel


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    He is the commander in Chief of the most powerful nation on earth and army and he has overseen US weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists. It is his job to protect Americans from terrorism, not supply it with weapons. Regarding the claim that he hasn't directly done it, makes it even worse if you believe that.

    It means you don't have a clue who you are backing, understand the ideology of Islam or the culture in that region. The only group worth supplying with weaponry is the Kurds (at least they seem the best moderate Islamic group from what I can see) and yet they are oppressed and hated by Turkey, have no state to call home.

    Yeah, but you're also talking complete pony****e, and apparently have little to no knowledge of American foreign policy in the Middle East stretching back over the second half of the 20th century.

    Obama didn't solve it. And he was also CoC while the Middle East was in its worst state, but even that started under Bush II (and had its roots going back much further). It devolved from there. You really cannot just take one guy you really dislike and try to pin the whole thing on him, it just does not work like that. -Reality- does not work like that. Your opinion does not equal fact, even in the dying days of Feelings Over Fact 2016.
    Billy86 wrote: »
    It really does complicate things for when Trump's boss tells him to put them back in though after Jan 20th, doesn't it? He's going to be in an absolutely awful negotiating position, insomuch that even if he has the authority to put all 35 diplomats back in place himself, if he does so against the wishes of the Republican (as well as obviously Democratic) party, it's going to cripple him for a number of different issues that he would need support on.

    Obama did try to help the guy at the start, but even he seems to have given up on it. While it is an appropriate sanction if he feels there is enough evidence to support it (and whatever you say about the guy, he has never shown himself inclined to create an international Incident for no reason - most of his detractors call him too cautious, in fact), I doubt he's missed that it's going to be a pain in the ass for Trump when he gets in. I suspect he actually doesn't really give a **** anymore if it makes it harder for Trump though at this point.


  • #7337
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    He is the President, of course Obama is at fault for US weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists. If he can't make the right decisions, then he shouldn't be President of the United States.

    So you do blame him for founding ISIS?


  • #7338
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    You really cannot just take one guy you really dislike and try to pin the whole thing on him
    You are talking utter bollocks with this. Under his administration US weapons have been found in the hands of ISIS. Obama is the Commander in Chief, it says so in the US Constitution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution

    I have said I don't think he is a bad guy, he is a nice guy, carries himself well. He is just a poor leader and poor military tactician. He is certainly no Hannibal or Alexander.


  • #7339
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    You are talking utter bollocks with this. Under his administration US weapons have been found in the hands of ISIS. Obama is the Commander in Chief, it says so in the US Constitution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution

    I have said I don't think he is a bad guy, he is a nice guy, carries himself well. He is just a poor leader and poor military tactician. He is certainly no Hannibal or Alexander.

    I can't wait to see what military historic figure Trump will be compared :)


  • #7340
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    You are talking utter bollocks with this. Under his administration US weapons have been found in the hands of ISIS. Obama is the Commander in Chief, it says so in the US Constitution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution

    I have said I don't think he is a bad guy, he is a nice guy, carries himself well. He is just a poor leader and poor military tactician. He is certainly no Hannibal or Alexander.

    Whats your point?

    Can you back it up. You are saying America is selling weapons directly to ISIS .

    Back it up .


  • #7341
    Renegade Mechanic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,928 ✭✭✭Renegade Mechanic


    Billy86 wrote: »
    So which is it, 2006 or 1999 that Obama took office? A little information wouldn't hurt, you know. :)

    It certainly wouldn't. :)
    They trace their roots to a hastily put together collection of tribes in Iraq, under a Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, you'll find.
    I'm of the belief many went back farther, hardened veterans of the conflicts in Afghanistan.

    In 2004 they joined Al Qaeda.

    The declaration of the Islamic Sate in Iraq that we're dealing with today happened in 2006.

    However it was nothing but an annoying idea.

    It wasn't until 2013, that they took advantage of a system Obama presided over, in which Americans abandoned INSANE amounts of military hardware (cheaper than shipping it back) while they retreated from the vacuum they'd created, training local Iraqis on average for a mere two weeks, and saying "good luck lads". Then, the actual legitimate "state" we're seeing today started carving itself out.

    You reckon someone as smart as Obama thought barely trained people would be able to keep more equipment than they even knew themselves existed - let alone the equipment they could see - from people who'd survived years of fighting against the odds?
    You reckon him and his advisor figured "yep, solid idea, that".

    Have a look at all the pictures they took, bragging about their new army of toys. Lots of tanks, thousands of Hummers, hundreds of thousands of weapons and millions of rounds of ammunition. Ironically, more than the Islamic State that captured them from the disintegrating Iraqi forces knew what do do with, either...

    Their formation isn't down to Obama, but their current threat is entirely the fault of his administration. The Bush administration made a huge mistake wading in, giving them space to operate, ideally, no one would have gone near the place, let Saddam ****ing deal with it and just pay the ****in euros he wanted for Iraq's oil, but no, they waded in, and Obama simply walking away after the fact was worse still.


  • Advertisement
  • #7342
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    You are talking utter bollocks with this. Under his administration US weapons have been found in the hands of ISIS. Obama is the Commander in Chief, it says so in the US Constitution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution

    I have said I don't think he is a bad guy, he is a nice guy, carries himself well. He is just a poor leader and poor military tactician. He is certainly no Hannibal or Alexander.

    I can't wait to see what military historic figure Trump will be compared :)
    Julius Caesar most likely.


  • #7343
    Renegade Mechanic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,928 ✭✭✭Renegade Mechanic


    HellSquirrel wrote: »
    Oh dear, a bunch of GOP folk are supporting it.

    It would tie the Trumpets in knots if Trump was still even pretending to be a Republican.

    Er... I figure most of the people approving of the chap did so because the Republicans hated him as much as the Democrats did...

    Hillary Clinton is funnily enough more Republican than Trump, likewise Trumps beliefs could put him more Democrat leaning than Hillary... :o

    I did some laughing when all the Republican candidates tried to "get together against Trump", like it wasn't still a total free for all in the backs of their heads :D


  • #7344
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Julius Caesar most likely.

    More like Caligula I'd say. ;)


  • #7345
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    A Little Pony wrote: »
     ISIS only grew as strong as they did because of the funding they received by the US government.

    Sorry Pony. Again if it's not too much trouble can you elaborate a bit on this please.

    Does this go beyond just arms in Syria. I'd be interested to know.


  • #7346
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Julius Caesar most likely.

    More like Caligula I'd say. ;)
    He will prove a lot of people wrong, I think he will be a great President and not like what people think.


  • #7347
    ebbsy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Julius Caesar most likely.

    More like Caligula I'd say. ;)
    He will prove a lot of people wrong, I think he will be a great President and not like what people think.

    God bless Pony. Trump has destroyed everybody in his path.

    May his reign be long and fruitful.


  • #7348
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    He will prove a lot of people wrong, I think he will be a great President and not like what people think.

    I'm sure of that. Just not the people you think ;)


  • #7349
    ebbsy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    Either way there will be 8 years of him followed by perhaps 8 years of his son.


  • #7350
    HellSquirrel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,078 ✭✭✭HellSquirrel


    Renegade Mechanic wrote: »
    Er... I figure most of the people approving of the chap did so because the Republicans hated him as much as the Democrats did...

    Hillary Clinton is funnily enough more Republican than Trump, likewise Trumps beliefs could put him more Democrat leaning than Hillary... :o

    I did some laughing when all the Republican candidates tried to "get together against Trump", like it wasn't still a total free for all in the backs of their heads :D

    Nah, I agree on that. Clinton has always been a conservative and never more so than in this election. She has left-wing views, sure, but she's generally conservative.

    And Trump was actually a Democrat prior to this election although I couldn't say offhand when he switched. He has held/holds a lot of "Democrat" principles too, particularly in terms of society (rather than economic/foreign policy), although they aren't particularly important enough for him to fight for if selling them will gain another supporter.

    The Republican candidates trying to "get together" on Trump was a bit cringeworthy. The best of them were stunningly mediocre (probably Jeb Bush).

    Actually...hm...okay, Trump, Cruz, Carson, Rubio, Bush were the main five contenders. Fiorina poked her head up a couple of times but was mostly noticeable for being female amongst the throng.

    ..I'm not really sure in retrospect that any of the rest of the also-rans really got a look in. Oh yeah, Kasich and Christie.

    Christie spent so much time looking desperate behind Trump that I'd forgotten he ran in his own right.

    Gilmore (who?), Santorum, Paul and Huckabee.

    And I suppose Perry, Graham, Jindal and Walker.

    Sheesh, they really should have had a limit to the amount of people. Maybe a Thunderdome prior to the first Republican debate to weed some of them out. It's no wonder the media focussed on the most startling-looking and startling-sounding one.


  • Advertisement
  • #7351
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    ebbsy wrote: »
    Either way there will be 8 years of him followed by perhaps 8 years of his son.

    I don't think so.

    Not because of any bias or because I don't like the idea or anything.

    I just think inexperience will catch up with him.

    Like if you appointed him general manager of a sports team. He'd have a few great ideas and do one or two positive things but his inability to just deal with the day to day things will catch up with him IMO. Similarly to how a sports team works, the machinery of government isn't just something you can assume you'll be fine at.

    Trump exploited the system like a pro and got himself elected brilliantly.

    I just think that running things is going to prove a lot harder for him.

    Also, as regards those around him it's always the case that when fringe elements, the protest lot etc, get elected, they have a tough time when they're in because great changes and grand gestures have nothing to do with the realpolitick. Trumps group has a lot of fringe to it (no pun intended)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement