Why do people always say "a politician misspoke?" They don't misspeak, they lie. In Biden's case, he probably has no idea what he says.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
and again, your argument is based on deflection. Biden had intel, as I've pointed out to you twice now, that suggested the collapse might be in as little as 14 days. That from Biden's own mouth. There were other slightly more optimistic estimates of course, but the question is...with the growing concern of a quicker collapse than was estimated while Trump was in office, and with an estimate of 14 days, would a reasonable person acting with a sound mind roll the dice and pull the rug out so quickly?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/17/us/politics/afghanistan-biden-administration.html
now, you'll read this from the NY Times and focus on the part that describes the intel community's inability to fix a time for the collapse, but I will not allow you to ignore the gist of the article, which highlights Biden's ignoring of the rapidly growing concern over a quicker collapse.
Biden shit the bed on this and no amount of deflection or apologist ignoring of the facts will change that.
ETA; I'm sorry, this makes three times.
Hey...maybe you're on to something there.
Like Trump "misspoke" when he said grab em by the pu$$y. Or he "misspoke" when he called them sh!thole countries. How about when he said good people on both sides? Hell, you cant give Pedo Joe a pass unless you were willing to give Trump a pass. But the libtards didnt do that. So now, they can suck a d1ck up in a pickup til they hiccup.
Logically, a reasonable person would accelerate the pullout. Which is what happened.
NO ONE was predicting that the Taliban would take over 14 days BEFORE our withdrawal date.
MOST were predicting that it would take the Taliban MONTHS - AFTER our withdrawal.
Repeating wrong info multiple times does not make it true. Nor does linking (as opposed to quoting) articles behind pay walls.
Oh great. Now we're going to quibble about another word choice, rather than celebrate being out of that shithole.
Logically, a reasonable person would have a reasonable plan in place first. We've already been over this with @blazers in the afghan thread. Even he admitted the execution went horribly wrong. He just wanted to ignore it, which appears to be what you want to do.
I'll take "Things I learned in College" for $200, Alex.
We're talking about War/occupation. I think your expectations are messed up if you thought there would be a farewell parade with flowers instead of bullets and bombs.
The execution didn't go well because:
I knew I shouldn't have tagged you. I figured there was no chance you would actually know what you were talking about now, but I tagged you anyway.
As long as they go to California, who cares. Unfortunately, they will go everyone and spread no telling how many diseases. But hey...at least they dont tweet mean things!!
They should be held in DC. My understanding is that all illegals released into the interior US have gone to every state but DC. Yes I know it's not a state but you should get the point.
I'd rather them not go to D.C. All the Democrats would do with that is claim a population boom in DC and use it as more reason to give DC statehood. No thanks.
you're just FOS (and a liar, most likely). Biden himself said there was intel that said a takeover could occur within fourteen days. He chose to ignore it, just as you too choose to be an ignoramus. That's indicated by the fact that you think choosing an accelerated, leave-it-all behind withdrawal would be wise, when everyone else on the planet, including the military, said otherwise.
I never said that there wasn't more optimistic intel and I clearly indicated that there was. What you choose to ignore is my question of the wisdom (or lack thereof) in rolling the dice when some intel indicated a very rapid takeover.
No one cares what a Biden butt-boy like you has to say on this matter. You're just a shameless apologist. What you say in defense of this fiasco won't wash here.
BTW, the article I linked was not behind a pay wall for me. There are scores of similar articles to read though, if you really care to face the truth of the matter. But you won't because you don't.
My bad for assuming a Carolina person would obviously be able to distinguish between 14 days BEFORE withdrawal and 14 days AFTER withdrawal.
Or maybe my mistake is assuming you are a Carolina person.
you have no idea what you're talking about. Withdrawal is what your dad should have practiced.
Oh yeah...here we go. Question someone's fandom due to their political beliefs.
Here you go @Archer2. Another example showing that these businesses are about money, not left wing liberal causes.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...oft-disney-lobby-groups-climate-bill-analysis
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...oft-disney-lobby-groups-climate-bill-analysis
You misunderstand. I wasn't questioning his fandom. I was just lamenting that he isn't showing the level of intelligence I expect from folks who went/go to UNC.
We'd probably get along fine if we were discussing basketball. Assuming he's a UNC basketball fan.
One thing I've learned over the years is that intelligence and a college degree don't go hand in hand. I know a lot of dumb people with a diploma and a lot of smart people without one.
You're definitely showing the level of liberal indoctrination I expect to see from folks who went/go to UNC.
LOL, you don't need to be questioning someone else's intelligence. Try demonstrating some of your own first. The idea that @chickenhunter is trying to convey is that you've abandoned anything resembling a reasonable argument since you don't have one, and have gone straight to attacking your opponent. And, you picked the most idiotic way to do it. You might as well be wearing a t-shirt that says 'MORON'.
But please forget all that and go back to telling us how spectacularly successful Biden's withdrawal was. That'll show how brilliant you are.
says the guy who resorted to childishness when he couldn't keep up.
Last edited:
not criticizing here, just commenting that these articles are usually considered rather simple-mindedly. Unless you bother to actually read the entire article, which most people won't, you would get the impression that because these businesses aren't supporting the bill, that they are opposed to combating climate change. What they are opposed to is the bill. To see why, one needs to know what is in the bill. In many if not most cases, there is a lot to be opposed to that isn't directly related to the subject of the bill or some part of it. Additionally, even if it is directly related, it might be deemed too expensive or too disruptive to the economy.
Politicians have even been known to purposely insert unacceptable junk into a bill that primarily addresses a worthy consideration, just so the opposition won't support it. Then they can say 'the Republicans (or the dems) are against rehabilitating wounded veterans because they don't support this bill that provides much-needed care for our wounded warriors'. You have to know what's in the bill before you pass judgement on support or non-support of it. And good luck slogging through the mountain of verbiage in many of them. Most of us won't, but big businesses certainly will.
Thank you. The majority of the proposed “infrastructure bill” isn’t even about infrastructure , it’s pork. It would be disastrous for our economy which is already on the brink of massive inflation. An infrastructure bill should be solely about infrastructure, and not something as specious as “human infrastructure”, but tangible stuff like roads and bridges. If legislators were honest about “climate change”, they would propose a stand alone climate change bill. But they won’t because they’re not honest, they’re corrupted by kickbacks.
We can’t afford to listen to people like Pelosi who said “We have to pass the ACA before we know what’s in it.“ Remember our POTUS repeatedly saying “If you like your plan, you can keep it, if you like your doctor, you can keep him”? How did that work out?
How about an infrastructure bill that deals solely with infrastructure and passes or fails based on its merits? Or a climate change bill that either passes or not based solely on its merits? Wouldn’t that be refreshing? Lawmakers are buying support for their bills by providing money to other legislators for pet projects and programs which aren’t remotely related to the actual bill’s supposed intention.
Last edited:
The two aren’t mutually exclusive, but I agree that in today’s world, money increasingly trumps morals. That’s unfortunate.
Amen.
Trump talking shit telling desantis not to run. Lol. I would love to see those two go head to head. I’d vote desantis a thousand times and twice on Sunday before trump. I bet a lot of other moderates and repubs feel the same
Trump will win the GOP primary if he wants to. By a lot. But I'd prefer someone the left can't attack as well so I'd prefer DeSantis too.
I'm a registered democrat so I won't vote for either in a primary. But whoever gets the nod, I'll vote for him in the general election. I'd vote a thousand times and twice on Sunday for a dead rat before I'd vote for a dem.
There’s no dem on the radar I would vote for currently. But I’m not dismissing the possibility
maybe wishful thinking but I don’t think trump has a chance in hell of winning presidency no matter who the dem is. If I were the repubs I push hard for desantis as the nominee. I think desantis destroys trump in a primary if he goes after the moderates in the party. No one wants that dumpster fire of an election repeated and that’s precisely what happens should trump run and lose. Here we go again with the claims of cheating and so on. That would be desantis selling point
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Transfer Portal Thread (Update 5-5, 4 PM: What Bigs Remain list added)- Latest: vikandpirate4christ
-
-
-