Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-03-2017 , 01:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Autocratic
Worth noting that A. Iran is fighting against ISIS for ****'s sake and B. the power vacuum in Iraq is like, distinctly the result of Western interference.
I agree, but it's not like Iran is funding pro-American forces. They may defeat ISIS, which is good, but then another vacuum exist, and they would also be anti-American.
02-03-2017 , 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kukraprout
I'm not sure what problem you would be trying to solve by attacking Iran but they have nothing to do with ISIS, for example. They're not on the same side in the Shia vs Sunni war.
Iran is big threat, but I want nothing to do with attacking them.
02-03-2017 , 01:57 PM
Regarding the Secret Service firings:

Secret service agents are required to report any illegalities they witness. Nor are they legally bound to remain silent once they leave service.

Private security is not bound by the first rule and can be contracted to remain silent after service.
02-03-2017 , 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
could be said about most of the Middle East
Right, but this is so direct and recent that it just goes to show how short sighted the people with their fingers on the trigger are. Re: the formation of ISIS, the primary narrative should be "we allowed this to happen." It's insane that we invaded Iraq under 15 years ago, an Islamic terrorist organization has seized power and territory in the resulting chaos, and the response is that Iran is somehow particularly culpable.
02-03-2017 , 02:00 PM
From a C-list talk radio host in Alabama in the 4th Skype seat: "Still too many brown people. When will the administration get rid of them?"

edit: was so swayed by his question on the browns, I completely missed that he ripped the media pool in the room, and the room groaned
02-03-2017 , 02:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhawks
It would be ugly, worse than Iraq. This is why, in my opinion, the Iran nuclear deal was bad. By agreeing to reduce their nuclear development, Iran had their sanctions lifted which resulted in assets being unfrozen and oil revenues to increase. Where do you think a lot of the money is going?
It's great that you just started with the assumption that we will be eventually invading iran, no matter what.
02-03-2017 , 02:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by champstark
Spicer just completely walked back everything on Israeli settlement policy Trump etc. have put forth so far.
They've already taken both sides, so I guess now that means they're back to supporting settlements.

---

Please please please let this administration go away soon. Four years of this is impossible.
02-03-2017 , 02:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Modernizing and liberalizing their society. Large investments especially in tech startups. They are smart, educated people who want freedom and prosperity.
I don't really doubt this, but ulterior motives exist.
02-03-2017 , 02:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhawks
Iran is big threat, but I want nothing to do with attacking them.
I missed this, so now I guess I'm just completely confused about your world view.
02-03-2017 , 02:02 PM
Paraphrasing NH Skype call question: "Opioid and heroin use is being dealt with. What about Fentanyl being manufactured in the north east?"

Spicer: "heroin. WALL! WALL! heroin. WALL!!!!!1111111111 WALL!!!!!111111111111ONE".

Never said the word Fentanyl in his answer. Deflecting piece of trash. I guess as an admitted former dependent on opioids, I have a strong hatred of them and things related.
02-03-2017 , 02:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by champstark
Spicer just completely walked back everything on Israeli settlement policy Trump etc. have put forth so far.
So where are we today? Trump etc have said a dozen different things wrt Israel.
02-03-2017 , 02:02 PM
I'd imagine this is their intent, but I legit get depressed from reading news updates and talking about it. I'm considering taking a break for my own personal sanity, but then I realize that means I'm giving up and giving them what they want.
02-03-2017 , 02:02 PM
Just speculation, but war with Iran could be used as reasoning for possible internment of Iranian-Americans or other Muslim Americans.
02-03-2017 , 02:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
They've already taken both sides, so I guess now that means they're back to supporting settlements.

---

Please please please let this administration go away soon. Four years of this is impossible.
Oh I thought the official line was in support, but today Spicer said they believe peace can happen with existing lines but that additional settlements are detrimental to the process.
02-03-2017 , 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycosid
It's great that you just started with the assumption that we will be eventually invading iran, no matter what.
I'm not assuming that we will invade, I really hope we don't. But if we did, it would be extremely ugly.
02-03-2017 , 02:04 PM
I assume this Skype nonsense is just the intermediary step to eliminating the live press pool. and going to full-time planted questions?
02-03-2017 , 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhawks
I agree, but it's not like Iran is funding pro-American forces. They may defeat ISIS, which is good, but then another vacuum exist, and they would also be anti-American.
First, Iranian perceptions of America are increasingly positive. Throwing that away is insane.

Second, and this builds on the first point, we are low on actual allies in the Middle East no matter what we do, and invading Iran doesn't solve that problem. They're our most likely Middle Eastern ally outside of Israel in 20 years time.
02-03-2017 , 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
No actually I do.
Really? Can you name 5 terrorist attacks that have occurred in Muslim countries without looking it up? Meaning, you can't say Paris but you can say Bali in 2016 or something like that. Give an estimate on the number of people killed too. Thanks. Should be easy since you care so much.
02-03-2017 , 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Autocratic
First, Iranian perceptions of America are increasingly positive. Throwing that away is insane.

Second, and this builds on the first point, we are low on actual allies in the Middle East no matter what we do, and invading Iran doesn't solve that problem. They're our most likely Middle Eastern ally outside of Israel in 20 years time.
Not to mention historically (and just naturally) Iran is a perfect fit as a US ally. If they magically became a democracy tomorrow we'd be BFFs within a few years (well, not under Trump, but whatever).
02-03-2017 , 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV Life
Really? Can you name 5 terrorist attacks that have occurred in Muslim countries without looking it up? Meaning, you can't say Paris but you can say Bali in 2016 or something like that. Give an estimate on the number of people killed too. Thanks. Should be easy since you care so much.
Also, please indicate if they were sponsored by Iran.
02-03-2017 , 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
Just speculation, but war with Iran could be used as reasoning for possible internment of Iranian-Americans or other Muslim Americans.
Boy would any actions against Iranian-Americans make it clear that it was about Islam because a lot, if not most, Iranian-Americans are Jewish or Christian (Armenian).
02-03-2017 , 02:10 PM
“We expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank,” Trump said during a meeting with business leaders Friday morning. “Because frankly, I have so many people, friends of mine, that had nice businesses, they just can’t borrow money …*because the banks just won’t let them borrow because of the rules and regulations in Dodd-Frank.”

big win for personal friends of donald trump
02-03-2017 , 02:12 PM
I can't name all of the shootings that took place in the US in the last 10 years does that mean I don't really care about them? It's a bull**** test and you know it.
02-03-2017 , 02:12 PM
Trump also intends to sign a separate presidential memorandum to roll back the Labor Department’s rules that would require financial professionals to put their clients’ interests ahead of their own. The “fiduciary rule,” scheduled to go into effect in April, has long been a target of Republicans, including close Trump Wall Street ally Anthony Scaramucci, who call it burdensome and costly.

this is great for scammers pretending to be financial professionals
02-03-2017 , 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Autocratic
First, Iranian perceptions of America are increasingly positive. Throwing that away is insane.

Second, and this builds on the first point, we are low on actual allies in the Middle East no matter what we do, and invading Iran doesn't solve that problem. They're our most likely Middle Eastern ally outside of Israel in 20 years time.
Do you think Israel and Iran can both be our allies at the same time?

      
m