BREAKING: US Launches Tomahawks Into Syria

You aren't owed an apology from anyone other than Trump.

Trump shouldn't and won't apologize. He's just doing exactly what his lemmings elected him to do. And the enthusiastic support he continues to get from them confirms that.

It's a shame that so many here have no qualms about aligning themselves with that though.
 
Just checking back in to see if I can find any Trump trannies apologizing yet..

Trump shouldn't and won't apologize..

So, you want an apology from people here, but not from Trump?

Rather than take your complaints to your congressmen, you expect satisfaction here?

I don't find your arguments or your agenda to be at all logical or inspiring.
 
This is assuming there was a real gas incident in the first place. There's way too big of a track record of fakery to accept even the basic premise of a gas incident at face value. Once you accept the premise, the rest is just details.

Watch this shit:


Yep.

I don't think Trump cares if it was a real attack or not. This was an opportunity for him to set an example, so he acted fast before it could be proven or investigated. Elementary school tactics. Punch somebody out of the blue in front of everyone. Now everyone will be careful when dealing with Trump. Basic, low level human nature. Don't mess with the crazy motherfucker!

Plus it caters to the neocons and MIC establishment.

Flushing the Constitution and (domestic and international) rule of law down the toilet is a small price to pay. Kind of standard procedure in D.C. already. Only Rand Paul and his friends will complain. The rest of Congress is praising Trump. The media is praising Trump. All hail Trump Caesar!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
Just a heads up to site mission supporters.

I just got a neg rep from Brian4liberty warning me not to antagonize people or name-call.

Last time that happened it was after Dannno reported me for using profanity in a private message to him and resulted soon after in a ban.

So just tread carefully. Support for the site mission is a dangerous thing around here.
 
Just a heads up to site mission supporters.

I just got a neg rep from Brian4liberty warning me not to antagonize people or name-call.

Last time that happened it was after Dannno reported me for using profanity in a private message to him and resulted soon after in a ban.

So just tread carefully. Support for the site mission is a dangerous thing around here.

+rep for B4L

-rep for you for being a crybaby.
 
+rep for B4L

-rep for you for being a crybaby.

Just to clarify the rules, [MENTION=1874]Brian4Liberty[/MENTION], I wouldn't want anybody disciplined for name calling, so I'm not asking for that to happen. But when it's done in support of Trump and his lemmings, it is ok. Am I right?
 
Just to clarify the rules, [MENTION=1874]Brian4Liberty[/MENTION], I wouldn't want anybody disciplined for name calling, so I'm not asking for that to happen. But when it's done in support of Trump and his lemmings, it is ok. Am I right?

No, the Community Guidelines apply equally. The staff will do the best we can to keep things on track - it will never be perfect of course, and can have problems at times too. We're not funded with lobbyist monies. Name calling doesn't matter, facts, logic and liberty do. Focus on that, flag problems when you see them and we'll be good.

Thanks!
 
No, the Community Guidelines apply equally. The staff will do the best we can to keep things on track - it will never be perfect of course

A step in the right direction would be changing the rules to allow more variety of opinions and discourse, rather than having mods discipline people for promoting the site mission.
 
Syrian state TV- officers going to the airfield to survey the damage:

 
BELIEVES???

Based on what, I wonder.

Regardless, since when is it our place?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
ccBXBkv.jpg
 
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
I think you guys are being too hard on some of the trump supporters. It seems to me that many of them are changing their minds about trump. How could they know he would do this? At least they're not partison, intellectually dishonest, hacks like zippy and count.

I agree and think they need to be reminded of what the choices were.

Trump - Despite some contradictory doubletalk he ran on not invading Syria, peace with Russia and was getting bashed as an isolationist over foreign policy statements. Ran as a nationalist, anti-globalist with a strong immigration and trade platform.

Hillary - ran as a known interventionist that wanted to shoot Russia plans out of the sky with a no-fly zone in Syria. Globalist, establishment status quo, supported TPP, need I say more.

Rand Paul - by summer of 15 his campaign was effectively over by his establishment pivot on tax, immigration and BLM. By August 15 it was pretty clear at that point he was not a serious candidate and was using the race to advance his senate campaign while clearly without shadow of a doubt was only running an educational campaign (as observed from his campaign stop speeches). A stepping stone campaign for 2020 due to a predicted Trump loss in 2016.

Daryl Castle - not a serious candidate and no effort being made to run a national campaign. More likely a campaign to advance his radio show.

Gary Johnson - supported a no fly zone in Syria while sounding totally ignorant on Syria. "What is Aleppo? Ran on open borders, pro TPP and had nutty Bill Weld on his ticket. A candidate no average voter would take seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
Back
Top