• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 07:00
CEST 13:00
KST 20:00
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202568RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced3BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Server Blocker Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced Simple editing of Brood War save files? (.mlx) BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
[G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food!
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 716 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4921

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4919 4920 4921 4922 4923 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
September 07 2016 18:23 GMT
#98401
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


On September 08 2016 03:21 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:19 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

do you have a link?

I'm not sure that it's been posted yet. He just gave it this morning.

well, I can't respond to something that's unavailable.
until then I'll have to stick to mocking trump for his general foolishness.


Welp, I think you just answered it. Foolishness on parade!
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 07 2016 18:24 GMT
#98402
And what do we do with all the hardened militias from that war? If the Soviets had stayed in Afghanistan we'd not have been attacked by Al Qaeda, they'd have been busy. If we defeat ISIS then suddenly we have a bunch of well armed and battle hardened militias who are pissed off at Turkey and Israel (among others). Boredom and militias is not a great combination, fortunately ISIS has already decimated Hezbollah but I can't imagine Israel is looking forward to the Iranian trained and battle hardened survivors returning. I'd bet a fair bit that Turkey doesn't want the Kurdish militias getting bored either and even Russia remembers that when Muslims aren't killing each other they're pretty high up on the list of targets due to Chechyna. It's easy to forget just how big and how recent the Moscow Theatre and Beslan School attacks were, but they were fucking huge.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-09-07 18:26:28
September 07 2016 18:24 GMT
#98403
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


it's not baseless at all. one of the thigns the military does, all the time, is prepare plans for various operations and contingencies. So i'm sure they already do have plans for it.
The hard part isn't the military defeat anyways, which could be done even with a very shitty plan.
even trump could make a plan to militarily defeat isis that would work, as could a child.

why must you unsoundly defend trump? surely there are people more worth the defense?
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
September 07 2016 18:26 GMT
#98404
On September 08 2016 03:24 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


it's not baseless at all. one of the thigns the military does, all the time, is prepare plans for various operations and contingencies. So i'm sure they already do have plans for it.
The hard part isn't the military defeat anyways, which could be done even with a very shitty plan.


Good god. Here you are continuing to presume that Trump isn't addressing things that I already said he has. That's one sick double down on ignorance.
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-09-07 18:31:30
September 07 2016 18:29 GMT
#98405
On September 08 2016 03:26 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:24 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


it's not baseless at all. one of the thigns the military does, all the time, is prepare plans for various operations and contingencies. So i'm sure they already do have plans for it.
The hard part isn't the military defeat anyways, which could be done even with a very shitty plan.


Good god. Here you are continuing to presume that Trump isn't addressing things that I already said he has. That's one sick double down on ignorance.

then provide the link. oh wait, you already said you can't. how about you stop arguing the point until you can actually provide the link so I can see for myself? especially given your long history of bias, I can't rely on your word on what trump addressed adequately.
it also doesn't change the validity of the claim that it's dumb that trump doesn't know we already have military plans for the job. or of the numerous other critiques. or of the fact that mocking trump is fun.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
ticklishmusic
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States15977 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-09-07 18:32:06
September 07 2016 18:30 GMT
#98406
On September 08 2016 03:12 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:03 ticklishmusic wrote:
On September 08 2016 02:52 xDaunt wrote:
You guys do understand that Point Number 1 doesn't mean that the military has to present a plan that destroys ISIS in 30 days of combat, right? He said he wants to see a plan to destroy ISIS 30 days after he takes office.


Pretty sure we already have a plan. Actually, we probably have like a bajillion of them. The military isn't just sitting around jerking themselves and polishing their buttons. But Trump will have the best plans, believe me.

To be particularly partisan, this looks like a transparent attempt at pandering in advance of the CiC town hall tonight. I call it transpandering.


I'm sure that there are numerous plans that exist, any number of which could be selected and then made current to account for current conditions on the ground, intelligence, and global deployments. There's nothing unreasonable about this first point, and I find it amusing that so many are attacking it.


The administration's ISIS strategy is based around no boots on the ground (though I think the advisers bit is toeing that line sometimes) and a variety of other parameters. It is likely the best, or one of the best, plans given the parameters set around what we're willing to invest in this effort and up to date with all the things you mentioned.

If under a President Trump those parameters change to include boots on the ground, less discriminatory strikes against targets with civilians around them and so forth there will be more options on the table and new plans will need to be made.

However, it's the difference between saying "we need a bridge across the river" and "we need to build a bridge across this river that can support x amount of traffic, can be completed in y time and costs z dollars". It's easy to say you can build a better bridge given none of the constraints of the current architect.
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
September 07 2016 18:34 GMT
#98407
On September 08 2016 03:29 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:24 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


it's not baseless at all. one of the thigns the military does, all the time, is prepare plans for various operations and contingencies. So i'm sure they already do have plans for it.
The hard part isn't the military defeat anyways, which could be done even with a very shitty plan.


Good god. Here you are continuing to presume that Trump isn't addressing things that I already said he has. That's one sick double down on ignorance.

then provide the link. oh wait, you already said you can't. how about you stop arguing the point until you can actually provide the link so I can see for myself? especially given your long history of bias, I can't rely on your word on what trump addressed adequately.


You are literally making shit up about Trump and yet you accuse me of being biased. This is too rich.

it also doesn't change the validity of the claim that it's dumb that trump doesn't know we already have military plans for the job. or of the numerous other critiques.


And you are still making shit up. Why are you presuming that Trump thinks that the military doesn't already have contingencies to take out ISIS? I already pointed out that any such plan has to be updated before it can be presented to Trump, hence there is nothing out of the ordinary in his request. It boggles the mind that you do not understand this very simple concept.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 07 2016 18:35 GMT
#98408
On September 08 2016 03:34 xDaunt wrote:
I already pointed out that any such plan has to be updated before it can be presented to Trump, hence there is nothing out of the ordinary in his request. It boggles the mind that you do not understand this very simple concept.

By removing any long words I assume.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
September 07 2016 18:36 GMT
#98409
On September 08 2016 03:30 ticklishmusic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:12 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:03 ticklishmusic wrote:
On September 08 2016 02:52 xDaunt wrote:
You guys do understand that Point Number 1 doesn't mean that the military has to present a plan that destroys ISIS in 30 days of combat, right? He said he wants to see a plan to destroy ISIS 30 days after he takes office.


Pretty sure we already have a plan. Actually, we probably have like a bajillion of them. The military isn't just sitting around jerking themselves and polishing their buttons. But Trump will have the best plans, believe me.

To be particularly partisan, this looks like a transparent attempt at pandering in advance of the CiC town hall tonight. I call it transpandering.


I'm sure that there are numerous plans that exist, any number of which could be selected and then made current to account for current conditions on the ground, intelligence, and global deployments. There's nothing unreasonable about this first point, and I find it amusing that so many are attacking it.


The administration's ISIS strategy is based around no boots on the ground (though I think the advisers bit is toeing that line sometimes) and a variety of other parameters. It is likely the best, or one of the best, plans given the parameters set around what we're willing to invest in this effort and up to date with all the things you mentioned.

If under a President Trump those parameters change to include boots on the ground, less discriminatory strikes against targets with civilians around them and so forth there will be more options on the table and new plans will need to be made.

However, it's the difference between saying "we need a bridge across the river" and "we need to build a bridge across this river that can support x amount of traffic, can be completed in y time and costs z dollars". It's easy to say you can build a better bridge given none of the constraints of the current architect.

I'm sure that the Pentagon has plans basic plans in place to address all of the options you describe above. They create plans for alien invasions and zombie apocalypses, FFS. My point is only that whatever plan that has been created already that best fits what Trump wants to do likely has been collecting dust for a while, and needs to be updated and revised before it can be deployed.
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-09-07 18:40:08
September 07 2016 18:38 GMT
#98410
On September 08 2016 03:34 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:29 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:24 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


it's not baseless at all. one of the thigns the military does, all the time, is prepare plans for various operations and contingencies. So i'm sure they already do have plans for it.
The hard part isn't the military defeat anyways, which could be done even with a very shitty plan.


Good god. Here you are continuing to presume that Trump isn't addressing things that I already said he has. That's one sick double down on ignorance.

then provide the link. oh wait, you already said you can't. how about you stop arguing the point until you can actually provide the link so I can see for myself? especially given your long history of bias, I can't rely on your word on what trump addressed adequately.


You are literally making shit up about Trump and yet you accuse me of being biased. This is too rich.

Show nested quote +
it also doesn't change the validity of the claim that it's dumb that trump doesn't know we already have military plans for the job. or of the numerous other critiques.


And you are still making shit up. Why are you presuming that Trump thinks that the military doesn't already have contingencies to take out ISIS? I already pointed out that any such plan has to be updated before it can be presented to Trump, hence there is nothing out of the ordinary in his request. It boggles the mind that you do not understand this very simple concept.

I accused you of such because you have a long demonstrated history of such.
I've also been very clear that I'm mocking trump, and it's clearly of a somewhat jocular nature, which allows for a bit more flexibility.
Military contingency plans would be continuously updated btw. And again, the plans don't really change anything, as we all know it's easy to do. The question is whether or not to pay the cost, for the limited actual benefits. So asking for a plan accomplishes nothing that wasn't already done.
And of course all the points about the other flaws in what he siad which you have not addressed.
I also maintain it'd be better for you to just wait until the thing is posted online then post it here so I can analyze it, instead of this silly spat you're bringing.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
CannonsNCarriers
Profile Joined April 2010
United States638 Posts
September 07 2016 18:38 GMT
#98411
On September 08 2016 03:34 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:29 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:24 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 zlefin wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:17 xDaunt wrote:
On September 08 2016 03:16 zlefin wrote:
It's dumb cuz we all know it's easy to militarily defeat ISIS, the question is how to handle the aftermath so things actually become stable. And on how much you want to spend.

And if you listen to Trump's speech (and not just read the bullet points), he very clearly understands that the solution is not just military in nature and talks about that.

you can't expect me to go off info you never provided; I look at hwat was brought into and maybe what was linked in the thread.

it also doesn't change that he doens't understand we already have plans that could defeat isis, and it's pretty darn easy to do so anyways.
and all the other points about his wasteful spending.


So let me get this straight. It's unfair for me to presume that you're up to speed on the issue, but it's perfectly okay for you to throw out baseless assumptions like the underlined above?


it's not baseless at all. one of the thigns the military does, all the time, is prepare plans for various operations and contingencies. So i'm sure they already do have plans for it.
The hard part isn't the military defeat anyways, which could be done even with a very shitty plan.


Good god. Here you are continuing to presume that Trump isn't addressing things that I already said he has. That's one sick double down on ignorance.

then provide the link. oh wait, you already said you can't. how about you stop arguing the point until you can actually provide the link so I can see for myself? especially given your long history of bias, I can't rely on your word on what trump addressed adequately.


You are literally making shit up about Trump and yet you accuse me of being biased. This is too rich.

Show nested quote +
it also doesn't change the validity of the claim that it's dumb that trump doesn't know we already have military plans for the job. or of the numerous other critiques.


And you are still making shit up. Why are you presuming that Trump thinks that the military doesn't already have contingencies to take out ISIS? I already pointed out that any such plan has to be updated before it can be presented to Trump, hence there is nothing out of the ordinary in his request. It boggles the mind that you do not understand this very simple concept.


Too much "yur bad" comments and not enough actual Trump plans. Here is a good one from March. Trump calls for ground 20-30k troops in Iraq to fight ISIS.

Donald Trump would deploy up to 30,000 American soldiers in the Middle East to defeat the Islamic State, he said at Thursday night’s debate.

Trump was answering a question about comments from General Lloyd Austin III, the head of U.S. Central Command who said more troops on the ground would be needed to defeat ISIS in Syria and Iraq.

“We really have no choice, we have to knock out ISIS,” Trump said. “I would listen to the generals, but I’m hearing numbers of 20,000-30,000.”

Trump typically rails against American military involvement around the world, but he was not alone in calling for ground troops in Iraq and Syria at the debate.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/trump-iraq-syria-220608
Dun tuch my cheezbrgr
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 07 2016 18:41 GMT
#98412
Donald Trump's campaign manager fired back Wednesday at an ad produced by the pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC Priorities USA taking on the Republican nominee's fitness to be commander in chief.

The 30-second ad out Tuesday, titled "I Love War," features Trump uttering the phrase, "I love war, in a certain way," at a rally last November, while featuring snippets of him remarking that he "knows more about ISIS than the generals do" and calling "nuclear, the power, the devastation ... very important to me."

"I love war, putting nuclear weapons on the table. The Clinton camp says that's irresponsible," ABC's George Stephanopoulos remarked to Kellyanne Conway at the start of their interview on "Good Morning America."

Conway responded that what is actually "irresponsible" is "taking little, cherry-picking little snippets of what he said and not giving the full context of the sentence let alone the speech."

"This woman was secretary of state for four years. And I think the reason she's struggling in the polls part is because aren't really fond of that record and she will be held account for that record," Conway said, ripping into Clinton over her recent polling troubles. "She's actually been in control of many aspects of our national security and our troops and our defense and I think that given all of her advantages, including her super PAC including her campaign hang spent over $200 million most in paid advertising one wonders why is she not at 50, 60 percent in the polls. Why isn’t she at 60, 65 percent among women? Hillary Clinton has a Hillary Clinton problem."

Asked what Trump means when he said, "I love war," Conway demurred.

"I'd have to see the entire snippet there but obviously many commanders in chief have made the very difficult decision to go to war," Conway responded. "You have Hillary Clinton as secretary of state calling a Russia reset that didn't work, she was wrong on Libya, she was wrong on Syria, she was certainly wrong on Benghazi and I think they'll both be held to account for that."

Conway went on to say that she was "glad" Clinton has "come out of hiding ... because people deserve a conversation with the candidates."

"You don't just do ads against each other. And we do very few ads," Conway said, touting Trump's recent campaign events and endorsements, including the 88 retired military generals and admirals who endorsed him Tuesday, and, Conway added, "he did a military preparedness town hall in Virginia then he was in North Carolina and he got to talk to the voters directly."


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 07 2016 18:43 GMT
#98413
I like that Conway doesn't know Benghazi is in Libya. It fits neatly with my belief that Trumpers think Ben Ghazi was the ambassador that died.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-09-07 18:45:59
September 07 2016 18:45 GMT
#98414
Yet another reason not to vote for Trump: his plan to deploy troops to “defeat ISIS”. Throwing our troops in to fight people with nothing to lose, no future beyond ISIS and with no clear goal or end to the military effort. In an area filled with conflict, chemical weapons and other groups that would gladly join the cause.

If Trump wanted to grant ISIS the greatest recruiting tool ever, all he needs to do is promise to invade Syria to stop them. Just give them the war they have been begging for.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
oBlade
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
United States5583 Posts
September 07 2016 18:49 GMT
#98415
On September 08 2016 03:45 Plansix wrote:
Yet another reason not to vote for Trump: his plan to deploy troops to “defeat ISIS”. Throwing our troops in to fight people with nothing to lose, no future beyond ISIS and with no clear goal or end to the military effort. In an area filled with conflict, chemical weapons and other groups that would gladly join the cause.

If Trump wanted to grant ISIS the greatest recruiting tool ever, all he needs to do is promise to invade Syria to stop them. Just give them the war they have been begging for.

"No, no, don't you understand, ISIS wants you to fight them."

The president should have intervened three years ago and that's why this is now an electoral issue.
"I read it. You know how to read, you ignorant fuck?" - Andy Dufresne
Dan HH
Profile Joined July 2012
Romania9118 Posts
September 07 2016 18:50 GMT
#98416
Found the speech xDaunt is talking about, haven't went through it yet

TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-09-07 18:59:48
September 07 2016 18:55 GMT
#98417
On September 08 2016 03:41 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
Donald Trump's campaign manager fired back Wednesday at an ad produced by the pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC Priorities USA taking on the Republican nominee's fitness to be commander in chief.

The 30-second ad out Tuesday, titled "I Love War," features Trump uttering the phrase, "I love war, in a certain way," at a rally last November, while featuring snippets of him remarking that he "knows more about ISIS than the generals do" and calling "nuclear, the power, the devastation ... very important to me."

"I love war, putting nuclear weapons on the table. The Clinton camp says that's irresponsible," ABC's George Stephanopoulos remarked to Kellyanne Conway at the start of their interview on "Good Morning America."

Conway responded that what is actually "irresponsible" is "taking little, cherry-picking little snippets of what he said and not giving the full context of the sentence let alone the speech."

"This woman was secretary of state for four years. And I think the reason she's struggling in the polls part is because aren't really fond of that record and she will be held account for that record," Conway said, ripping into Clinton over her recent polling troubles. "She's actually been in control of many aspects of our national security and our troops and our defense and I think that given all of her advantages, including her super PAC including her campaign hang spent over $200 million most in paid advertising one wonders why is she not at 50, 60 percent in the polls. Why isn’t she at 60, 65 percent among women? Hillary Clinton has a Hillary Clinton problem."

Asked what Trump means when he said, "I love war," Conway demurred.

"I'd have to see the entire snippet there but obviously many commanders in chief have made the very difficult decision to go to war," Conway responded. "You have Hillary Clinton as secretary of state calling a Russia reset that didn't work, she was wrong on Libya, she was wrong on Syria, she was certainly wrong on Benghazi and I think they'll both be held to account for that."

Conway went on to say that she was "glad" Clinton has "come out of hiding ... because people deserve a conversation with the candidates."

"You don't just do ads against each other. And we do very few ads," Conway said, touting Trump's recent campaign events and endorsements, including the 88 retired military generals and admirals who endorsed him Tuesday, and, Conway added, "he did a military preparedness town hall in Virginia then he was in North Carolina and he got to talk to the voters directly."


Source


Absolutely hilarious that she says "you have to hear the context" and doesn't actually know the context as his campaign manager despite having a clearly prepped response.

(for reference here's some more context: "This is the Trump theory on war," he said. "But I'm good at war. I've had a lot of wars of my own. I'm really good at war. I love war in a certain way. But only when we win.")

On September 08 2016 03:49 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:45 Plansix wrote:
Yet another reason not to vote for Trump: his plan to deploy troops to “defeat ISIS”. Throwing our troops in to fight people with nothing to lose, no future beyond ISIS and with no clear goal or end to the military effort. In an area filled with conflict, chemical weapons and other groups that would gladly join the cause.

If Trump wanted to grant ISIS the greatest recruiting tool ever, all he needs to do is promise to invade Syria to stop them. Just give them the war they have been begging for.

"No, no, don't you understand, ISIS wants you to fight them."

The president should have intervened three years ago and that's why this is now an electoral issue.


Do you think the U.S. isn't fighting ISIS or something? We're just not deploying into another quagmire. Yet, anyway.
CannonsNCarriers
Profile Joined April 2010
United States638 Posts
September 07 2016 18:57 GMT
#98418
On September 08 2016 03:49 oBlade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2016 03:45 Plansix wrote:
Yet another reason not to vote for Trump: his plan to deploy troops to “defeat ISIS”. Throwing our troops in to fight people with nothing to lose, no future beyond ISIS and with no clear goal or end to the military effort. In an area filled with conflict, chemical weapons and other groups that would gladly join the cause.

If Trump wanted to grant ISIS the greatest recruiting tool ever, all he needs to do is promise to invade Syria to stop them. Just give them the war they have been begging for.

"No, no, don't you understand, ISIS wants you to fight them."

The president should have intervened three years ago and that's why this is now an electoral issue.


No, fuck that. If we intervened* in Syria then we would be responsible for all the carnage happening now**. Do you remember Iraq 2005? When we toppled the tyrant and the people turned on each other, it became America's problem. You break it, you bought it.

* Can you specifically explain the parameters of this imagined intervention? Precisely what did you have in mind? NFZ would have done diddly. At most it would have resulted in more cities under rebel control. Peacekeepers/Western Occupiers would have united the Jihadists into a monolithic anti western bloc instead of squabbling rivals as they are now. Toppling Assad with no occupation afterwards would have turned Syria into a bigger and vastly bloodier Libya with various warlords controlling shifting territory.

** any intervention would have resulted in instability and carnage, but with different groups shooting at each other but with the bonus of some of them shooting at Americans too. The magnitude of the carnage may have been different to an unknowable degree.
Dun tuch my cheezbrgr
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 07 2016 19:02 GMT
#98419
Also unlike Iraq Syria actually has chemical weapons.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
September 07 2016 19:04 GMT
#98420
The key with criticizing Obama’s response to Syria is to never provide specifics, only say that we should have done more and done better. Specifics have counter points and reasons why that solution isn’t viable. Just ask questions like “So you think the current situation in Syria is acceptable?” Keep the burden of response on other people. Then you don’t need to support your criticism.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Prev 1 4919 4920 4921 4922 4923 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
CranKy Ducklings
10:00
Master Swan Open #94
CranKy Ducklings79
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ProTech54
StarCraft: Brood War
Barracks 2339
Bisu 1044
Flash 515
Jaedong 449
Shuttle 417
Larva 411
ToSsGirL 377
EffOrt 313
firebathero 298
Hyun 171
[ Show more ]
Soulkey 164
Last 128
ggaemo 108
ZerO 73
Rush 69
Free 52
Shinee 30
zelot 26
sSak 20
Movie 18
IntoTheRainbow 4
BeSt 0
Dota 2
XcaliburYe849
Counter-Strike
shoxiejesuss603
edward97
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor231
Other Games
singsing2124
Beastyqt692
Happy492
Fuzer 341
crisheroes302
B2W.Neo290
ZerO(Twitch)13
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
lovetv 10
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH264
• StrangeGG 56
• Adnapsc2 14
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2277
League of Legends
• Jankos1678
Upcoming Events
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3h
CSO Cup
5h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
7h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
22h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 3h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 7h
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Online Event
3 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
The PondCast
4 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
5 days
Korean StarCraft League
6 days
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL Team Wars
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.