WinnyThePoo wrote: » Do you not realize why Trump came out with the 'rigged election' angle whilst he was a candidate .
mcmoustache wrote: » I'll repeat it for you.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » I don't even know what you on about explain yourself.
mcmoustache wrote: » The skripal thread was the same. If you can remember, Russia promoted multiple, mutually exclusive alternative theories. He made the same claims despite it not being logically possible for them to all be true.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » Your upset that a few fake Russia online accounts supported Trump? Russia has 156 million people are you so sure this was not some lonely Russia girls/guys just showing an interest in the US election? How can a few online accounts push 60 million voters to pick Trump?
Cheerful Spring wrote: » Even if the GRU hacked the DNC what the complaint? They exposed corruption at the highest levels. A rigged primary election. Hilary and DNC got exposed for the corrupt people they really are well done Russia. Trump, as far I have seen ran a fair fight with her and he had his own fair share of scandals that would have ended the presidency run just goes to show it was the popular support that won out not Russian intervening in the election.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » Funnelling money to Trump campaign. This would be a big deal if Putin was directly funding his campaign what evidence you got for that?
Hurrache wrote: » Do you realise you're actually arguing against yourself now?
goodolegill wrote: » The information didn't need to sway 60 million people, the partisan nature of a 2 party system already has their soldiers on each side. Trump's "representation" as the head of the Republican party need to bring along staunch republicans and independents. The election came down to 80,000 votes in 3-4 states so don't downplay the role that negative propaganda can do. Why do you think campaigns spend so much time and money on their social media targeting. "The deep democratic party corruption" What exactly is meant by this statement. Did the Democratic Party favour one candidate over another. Damn right they did, Hillary (as flawed as she was) was one of their own, a first lady to a success regime, a secretary of state and a champion for the democratic center. Bernie was none of those, he wasn't even classified as a democrat, he spent his years in congress as an independent. So this notion that this was corruption, they wanted one of their own to win rather than an outsider as sure as I am that the GOP would have favoured Marco Rubio over Trump. Hillary Clinton received 2-3 million more votes than Sanders so was legitimately the Democratic candidate. To conflate - getting the questions ahead of a debate to working with a foreign adversary to arrange a meeting for information on your opponent that was stolen seems ludicrous. But I can rarely make sense of Trump cult members :eek:
Professor Moriarty wrote: » I read that document - or the bits that were left after it was heavily redacted. It certainly states categorically that the CIA believed that Iraq possessed a variety of WMDs. Where did the document come from?
mcmoustache wrote: » I never said that. My claim is that Russia intervened in the US election to support Trump. They did this through social media targetting, GRU hackers and by funneling money into Trump's campaign. Feel free to challenge any of that because there's a heap of evidence out there supporting my claims.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » People on this board forget too easily intelligence services lied to the world about Iraq WMD and other things since 2003. Some of us have longer memories. A few fake facebook accounts supporting Trump is hardly going to sway 60 million Americans to vote for Trump. There absolutely nothing that's show people were swayed by the Russians to vote Trump. Frankly, even if the Russians did hack the DNC they did the world and US people a service as they highlighted deep corruption in the Democratic primary that's the real scandal. Why is CNN not going after these people? Maybe the democrats are disappointed their corruption was found out. They obviously are trying to switch focus off them to Trump.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXpRswM-tzc
Are you seriously saying, that after all the indictments, all guilty pleas, all the evidence that's out in the open that Russia had nothing to do with this?
Cheerful Spring wrote: » Not sure what world you live its established already Iraq WMD intelligence was fake. People who are not dumb to fall for the same lies again.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » What’s interesting to me how much the American left is ultra nationalistic. It’s unique in the developed western world. Accusations of treason, fetishing of the military or the secret services. The sheer inability to know the history of their own country’s involvement in the elections (and the overthrow of democracy) in dozens of countries, including Russia.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » That Russia won the election for Trump yes that's fantasy promoted by people like you.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » We have the document that's just nonsense. CIA can say what they like after the invasion but they did say Iraq had WMD. Read the key judgementshttps://fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd-nie.pdf
mcmoustache wrote: » Are you seriously saying, that after all the indictments, all guilty pleas, all the evidence that's out in the open that Russia had nothing to do with this?
Hurrache wrote: » Have you been in touch with the UN Security Council, and various government committees around the world to tell them they're all wrong? And who's "we"?
Cheerful Spring wrote: » 5 or 6 months ago they were sending ICBMs over Japan. Since then they have stopped testing, have blown up 2 nuclear facility sites and are in the process of handing over Korean war dead remains. North and South Korea are openly communicating with each other. They are in better place than 6 months ago. Trump economic growth is strong he has brought in policies that keep jobs in America. Bad for us but he is the US president it's his job to look after America. US: 71.7 percent of its combined defense expenditure. In short, the U.S. contributed more funds to NATO than Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and Canada combined. It does not matter if they cause less crime they are entering the country illegally this puts a burden on a country resources.
Hurrache wrote: » They didn't, they said there was no definitive proof, and there was the small matter of a faked dossier. The CIA said the WMD rationale was nonsense so the US government at the time moved to throw in other reasons to invade.http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/08/wbr.iraq.claims/ How do you not know any of this well publicised scandal?
Cheerful Spring wrote: » It all linked why do you think the democrats are so upset with Russia they needed someone to blame. Let's ignore we are corrupt ourselves and start blaming Russia nobody will talk about how corrupt we are then. Who in the media talks about that anymore forgotten as if it never happened.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Isn’t the Russians hacked the US elections a literal conspiracy theory?
WinnyThePoo wrote: » No one can fault you for originality:D
Itssoeasy wrote: » 1.What peace with North Korea would that be exactly ? The North Koreans have no intention of giving up their nuclear weapons. They have done this before, the only difference is a sitting US president has given them legitimacy. Having better relations with Russia would be a positive but not the way trump is doing it. 2. The economy was doing fine way before trump took office so let's not give trump all the credit. 3. Yes Iran had issues with many things including how women are treated, but so do the Saudis who trump has no problem with. The women issue isn't why he dislikes them. It's Israel that doesn't like them. 4.The US does not pay for all of NATO btw. It pays about 60 percent or less. Also Trump saying that other NATO countries should pay up to 4% GDP on defense. The US doesn't even spend that now, it spends 3.3 % according to the pentagon. 4. Illegal immigrants are shown to cause less crime than American citizens. Also what havoc are they causing ? Any links as havoc suggests widespread trouble.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » Yes they did how else would Bush have gotten his war. The assessments came from the CIA unless you think the FBI was operating in Iraq?
The CIA had separately concluded that reports of Iraqi training on weapons of mass destruction were "episodic, sketchy, or not corroborated in other channels," the inspector general's report said
What's clear now is that earlier intelligence reports suggesting Saddam Hussein's regime was attempting to obtain uranium from the African nation of Niger were based on false information, including forged documents. But what's even more embarrassing to Bush administration officials is that the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department had themselves earlier concluded the Niger uranium reports were almost certainly not true.
Cheerful Spring wrote: » I not sure why people are opposed to better relationships. Frankly peace with North Korea and Russia is not a bad thing. Is the economy not doing better in terms of jobs? Iran issue is problematic but Iran has serious issues how it treats women so it needs to cleanups its act. I think Trump would do better talking to them. Trump has a point about Nato why should the US pay for it all? If other countries are not paying for protection he has a right to talk about that. Illegal immigration. Its illegal for a reason you can't have people coming in and wrecking havoc.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Colin Powell was a politician when he said that. So, unlike their categorical and very public assertion that Russia interfered in the election, neither the CIA or the NSA ever stated that Iraq was making WMDs?
