Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It looks like you are just as bad as the "sleazy don" you are trying to attack.
what is the purpose of your thread anyway?
The purpose is to point out the candidate should not be elected at this time in history with such an abysmal lack of knowledge and understanding with regard to foreign policy and national security.
I am not attacking Sleazy Don, I am pointing out his extreme failings in THE MAIN RESPONSIBILITY of the POTUS.
The purpose is to point out the candidate should not be elected at this time in history with such an abysmal lack of knowledge and understanding with regard to foreign policy and national security.
I am not attacking Sleazy Don, I am pointing out his extreme failings in THE MAIN RESPONSIBILITY of the POTUS.
well, that is fine. But you did post this
...tells them they can engage in war crimes they will feel better about more tours.
What do you mean by that? I don't care how much you dislike Donald Trump, but your above comment just sounds very insensitive.
Again with "Sleazy Don" garbage. It doesn't make you look smart or clever. Pretty sad actually. I wonder if you have alot of cats and wind chimes. Just weird...
You didn't say he couldn't read, you said he was uneducated. A person who attends Wharton, widely considered one of the best business schools in the country, if not the world, wouldn't normally be considered uneducated. I would argue that being an embarrassment as a First Lady and a failure as SoS would make someone possibly the least qualified as POTUS compared to the rest of the candidates
So you compare Sleazy Don to Hilary? Both are the fuse that will light the destruction of the US.
Again, my comment regarding Sleazy Don is that he lacks subject knowledge and intellectual curiosity that a CIC NEEDS in this particular time in our history.
...tells them they can engage in war crimes they will feel better about more tours.
What do you mean by that? I don't care how much you dislike Donald Trump, but your above comment just sounds very insensitive.
I meant that Trump wants to do away with the Geneva Conventions because our soldiers are not allowed to torture and commit war crimes. Did you read the articles?
The Geneva Conventions were put in place to protect our soldiers and all soldiers in battle by setting out universal rules of engagement to all countries who signed the GC. Of course, ISIS is not a signatory of the GC, but Trump thinks that the US should not be bound by the GC.
What foreign policy experience did Obama have when he was elected? His handling of foreign affairs has been dismal. Yet, somehow by some miracle, "the planet" is still here.
My thought, RADICAL change of rules of engagement is the problem, not Geneva convention. So I disagree with Trump on this one. He should be addressing the issue of RADICAL change of rules of engagement. Also, they (savages) will torture American troops simply because they are American troops. Again, not saying Geneva convention is the "problem" it is not.
The battle of Ganjgal in Afghanistan’s Kunar province proved to be historic. An Army captain and a Marine earned Medals of Honor for their efforts in the 10-hour firefight.
One of the recipient said
“I am not a politician. I am just the guy on the ground asking for that ammunition to be dropped because it’s going to save lives.”
Radical change of rules of engagement in battle field is a proven disaster.
Again with "Sleazy Don" garbage. It doesn't make you look smart or clever. Pretty sad actually. I wonder if you have alot of cats and wind chimes. Just weird...
I meant that Trump wants to do away with the Geneva Conventions because our soldiers are not allowed to torture and commit war crimes. Did you read the articles?
The Geneva Conventions were put in place to protect our soldiers and all soldiers in battle by setting out universal rules of engagement to all countries who signed the GC. Of course, ISIS is not a signatory of the GC, but Trump thinks that the US should not be bound by the GC.
Where does Cruz's call for carpet bombing and killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians fit into you GC narrative? Isn't that just as bad as torture?
Every anti-Trump thread you start is really a Pro-Cruz thread in sheep's clothing. How can you say that one (Trump) is bad, and justify your support for the other (Cruz)?
Both are equally as bad when it comes to foreign policy and dealing with Isis or any other rogue nation. Only real difference is that Cruz has been in the House and Senate, had access to information that Trump hasn't had, and should know better.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
