Posted on May 13, 2022
Trump Wanted to Bomb Mexico; Katie Porter Gives Powerful Speech on Inflation: A Closer Look
846
25
36
8
8
0
Trump Wanted to Bomb Mexico; Katie Porter Gives Powerful Speech on Inflation: A Closer Look...
Seth takes a closer look at Democratic Congresswoman Katie Porter making a powerful speech to her colleagues about solving the cost-of-living crisis and Donald Trump wanting to bomb Mexico and pretend it wasn’t us...
Seth takes a closer look at Democratic Congresswoman Katie Porter making a powerful speech to her colleagues about solving the cost-of-living crisis and Donald Trump wanting to bomb Mexico and pretend it wasn’t us...
Media
Donald Trump
Humor
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 1
0
0
0
Are you saying that Mexican drug cartels ARE Mexico? That seems rather xenophobic.
Do Mexican drug cartels pose a national security risk? Are they legitimate targets for direct action by our military forces? By covert assets? Honestly, I can't think of a reason any president would not want the fullest explanation of why we can't act against drug cartels and what would be the ramifications of doing so. I think it is a legitimate question to ask.
You see context matters. Unless you are so frightened of the boogie man, you don't care about context, that you don't care if your fear mangles the truth beyond recognition.
Do Mexican drug cartels pose a national security risk? Are they legitimate targets for direct action by our military forces? By covert assets? Honestly, I can't think of a reason any president would not want the fullest explanation of why we can't act against drug cartels and what would be the ramifications of doing so. I think it is a legitimate question to ask.
You see context matters. Unless you are so frightened of the boogie man, you don't care about context, that you don't care if your fear mangles the truth beyond recognition.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
Maj John Bell - If it were successful, it wouldn't be "covert" long. Trump wouldn't be able to get out of his own way fast enough to claim credit.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
MSgt Steve Sweeney - Well if it worked, he would have been right. You, I and his advisors would have been wrong. Isn't that kind of always the case in any successful gamble that succeeds despite what armchair generals and the experts say? That is either brilliance or luck. And nobody ever really knows which. That brings me back to the question.
Fourth time asking:
President Trump to the best of my knowledge never ordered a large-scale kinetic strike against the cartels in Mexico. Yup, he considered it. Yup, he wanted to do it. Considering and wanting are not the same thing as doing. So, I'm trying to understand your bitch in this case. Are you unhappy because the thought came to his mind? Because he discussed it with his advisors? Because in the end he decided not to order it? Because he is President Trump? What?!
Fourth time asking:
President Trump to the best of my knowledge never ordered a large-scale kinetic strike against the cartels in Mexico. Yup, he considered it. Yup, he wanted to do it. Considering and wanting are not the same thing as doing. So, I'm trying to understand your bitch in this case. Are you unhappy because the thought came to his mind? Because he discussed it with his advisors? Because in the end he decided not to order it? Because he is President Trump? What?!
(0)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
Maj John Bell - Again, as I said before, my contention is that Trump is a self-serving idiot as evidenced by the thought that launching missiles and/or bombs into a neighboring sovereign country was a good idea, along with a laundry list of other actions and statements is a testament to the man's level of grift, deceit, and otherwise self-serving, wanna-be tough guy behavior.
What is it you are not following exactly?
What is it you are not following exactly?
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
MSgt Steve Sweeney - I get that you dislike President Trump, as evidenced by your statement "along with a laundry list of other actions and statements is a testament to the man's level of grift, deceit, and otherwise self-serving, wanna-be tough guy behavior." As I accept your overall distaste, there is no need to keep hammering on that point. But the original post was about ONE SINGLE IDEA posited by President Trump. When did it transition to "a laundry list of other actions and statements?"
"Get a line on what you are arguing and try to land the plane. Someone should let you know; more is not always better. Try to be succinct. More is not always better if it runs all over the place." Sound familiar?
The U.S. has considered the drug cartels (Mexican or other), in one form or another, a national security threat since the late 1960's. Do you really believe that President Trump is the first, last and/or only president to consider a "kinetic strike" against drug cartels? This nation's military and commanders-in-chief don't declare a national security threat and then take "kinetic strikes" off the table of considered courses of action. There is a library of already written "kinetic strike" operation plans for a host of contingencies, all of which would require presidential approval. Most of which were, for one reason or another considered "less than optimal," at least for the time being. And they are continually revised and updated, by people only once or twice removed from direct contact with the president.
What I don't follow EXACTLY, is this about the idea of a covert "kinetic strike" on foreign soil, without approval of that sovereign nation? Or about your dislike of President Trump? Any president who has held the office in the last 60 years, pick the one you hold in highest regard. If he had posited the same question of his cabinet, would it be evidence that president is/was a self-serving idiot. Which is the horse? Which is the cart? Specific to this one single considered "kinetic strike," is President Trump a self-serving idiot because he considered a bad idea? Or is it a bad idea specifically because President Trump considered it?
"Get a line on what you are arguing and try to land the plane. Someone should let you know; more is not always better. Try to be succinct. More is not always better if it runs all over the place." Sound familiar?
The U.S. has considered the drug cartels (Mexican or other), in one form or another, a national security threat since the late 1960's. Do you really believe that President Trump is the first, last and/or only president to consider a "kinetic strike" against drug cartels? This nation's military and commanders-in-chief don't declare a national security threat and then take "kinetic strikes" off the table of considered courses of action. There is a library of already written "kinetic strike" operation plans for a host of contingencies, all of which would require presidential approval. Most of which were, for one reason or another considered "less than optimal," at least for the time being. And they are continually revised and updated, by people only once or twice removed from direct contact with the president.
What I don't follow EXACTLY, is this about the idea of a covert "kinetic strike" on foreign soil, without approval of that sovereign nation? Or about your dislike of President Trump? Any president who has held the office in the last 60 years, pick the one you hold in highest regard. If he had posited the same question of his cabinet, would it be evidence that president is/was a self-serving idiot. Which is the horse? Which is the cart? Specific to this one single considered "kinetic strike," is President Trump a self-serving idiot because he considered a bad idea? Or is it a bad idea specifically because President Trump considered it?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google