He really knows little about anything outside of real estate and "deals." Who else could manage to anger both sides of the abortion debate simultaneously?
The current situation, as you allude, is that our military is held to restrictions far beyond the Geneva Conventions. Meanwhile, we hold our foes to no standards at all. Under the Laws of Armed Conflict, most of the people we've been fighting for decades could have been summarily executed legally.
Obama isn't interested in killing our enemies, (I think because he's a Muslim sympathizer above all else except an America-hater) he's only interested in the appearance of fighting the enemy for political/optical reasons.
What else explains not killing an ISIS petroleum convoy because the smoke would increase global warming? Pure idiocy!
Fri Apr 01, 12:00:00 PM CDT
Bill said...
I thought the reason given was to spare the truck drivers.
Unless they were kidnapped, who gives a shit about ISIS truck drivers? I mean I realize ISIS rabble aren't that bright, but surely they can drive their own trucks.
I heard it was for environmental reasons, seriously, this is not an April Fool's joke. ;-)
Fri Apr 01, 12:06:00 PM CDT
Bill said...
Well, as you know, in Obamaworld, Climate Change is a much bigger threat than (censored) terrorism.
Which word did you censor Bill, "f-ing" or "Islamic"? Because both fit nicely into your sentence. ;-)
Fri Apr 01, 04:20:00 PM CDT
Bill said...
Did you see where the White House censored the President of France when he said "Islamist terrorism" today in Obama's silly summit? Literally removed it from the video and the translation!
Yeah, one of the dumbest, silliest things I've ever seen from a political class that is supposed to be serious.
What a kindergarten administration this is who believes that if they don't utter the words "Islamic terrorism" then it doesn't exist and we don't have to blame Islam and Muslims for it.
Sat Apr 02, 06:29:00 AM CDT
Bill said...
I think the wise Republicans of Wisconsin may have solved the problem.
Trump to Bret Baier on torture:....“The problem is we have the Geneva Conventions, all sorts of rules and regulations, so the soldiers are afraid to fight."
Huh? The Geneva conventions aren't why our soldiers are afraid to fight. It's the idiotic, politically-correct rules of engagement on which the President and Pentagon insist, that prevent our guys from efficiently killing the enemy because they're afraid of being prosecuted and thrown in the brig.
The Geneva Conventions dictate how prisoners of war and injured soldiers should be treated, not how you kill your enemy on the battlefield. Trump is an ignoramous.
Here, Trump indicates how much he actually knows about fighting a war.
[Image]
11 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formHe really knows little about anything outside of real estate and "deals." Who else could manage to anger both sides of the abortion debate simultaneously?
The current situation, as you allude, is that our military is held to restrictions far beyond the Geneva Conventions. Meanwhile, we hold our foes to no standards at all. Under the Laws of Armed Conflict, most of the people we've been fighting for decades could have been summarily executed legally.
Fri Apr 01, 11:44:00 AM CDT
Obama isn't interested in killing our enemies, (I think because he's a Muslim sympathizer above all else except an America-hater) he's only interested in the appearance of fighting the enemy for political/optical reasons.
What else explains not killing an ISIS petroleum convoy because the smoke would increase global warming? Pure idiocy!
Fri Apr 01, 12:00:00 PM CDT
I thought the reason given was to spare the truck drivers.
Your explanation makes more "Obamasense."
Fri Apr 01, 12:03:00 PM CDT
Unless they were kidnapped, who gives a shit about ISIS truck drivers? I mean I realize ISIS rabble aren't that bright, but surely they can drive their own trucks.
I heard it was for environmental reasons, seriously, this is not an April Fool's joke. ;-)
Fri Apr 01, 12:06:00 PM CDT
Well, as you know, in Obamaworld, Climate Change is a much bigger threat than (censored) terrorism.
Fri Apr 01, 03:42:00 PM CDT
Which word did you censor Bill, "f-ing" or "Islamic"? Because both fit nicely into your sentence. ;-)
Fri Apr 01, 04:20:00 PM CDT
Did you see where the White House censored the President of France when he said "Islamist terrorism" today in Obama's silly summit? Literally removed it from the video and the translation!
Fri Apr 01, 04:43:00 PM CDT
Yeah, one of the dumbest, silliest things I've ever seen from a political class that is supposed to be serious.
What a kindergarten administration this is who believes that if they don't utter the words "Islamic terrorism" then it doesn't exist and we don't have to blame Islam and Muslims for it.
Sat Apr 02, 06:29:00 AM CDT
I think the wise Republicans of Wisconsin may have solved the problem.
Thu Apr 07, 10:07:00 AM CDT
"...one of the dumbest, silliest things I've ever seen...."
Almost as dumb and silly as the notion that if we don't utter the words, "American terrorism", it doesn't exist.
Thu Apr 07, 11:38:00 AM CDT
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb67.htm
Here is my speech on the topic.
Fri Apr 08, 01:51:00 PM CDT