Cont: The Trump Presidency Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Great Zaganza said:
Trying to ignore the diversion here:

what do we actually know about how the soldiers died in Niger?
Official information seems to be sketchy to non-existent.
Click to expand...

I was reading this article about it this morning. I don't know a ton about military issues, but it doesn't seem inherently bizarre that those of us in the general public wouldn't be told every detail about intelligence/special forces types of operations. The relevant Congressional Committees should be told a lot more, though. And they should launch a proper investigation if what they're told doesn't pass the smell test.
 
Civet said:
I was reading this article about it this morning. I don't know a ton about military issues, but it doesn't seem inherently bizarre that those of us in the general public wouldn't be told every detail about intelligence/special forces types of operations. The relevant Congressional Committees should be told a lot more, though. And they should launch a proper investigation if what they're told doesn't pass the smell test.
Click to expand...


Some of us across the political spectrum would argue that when American soldiers are killed in battle, Americans are entitled to know why, especially when there is the possibility of bad judgment by command. From your link:
The U.S. troops were armed with only rifles, and they arrived at the site in unarmored pickup trucks. CNN reports that the militants were wielding small arms, machine guns, and rocked-propelled grenades. One Pentagon official acknowledged that they were “well-equipped and trained.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Mattis didn't know about it? Did The PDJT do an end run around him and order it on his own as Commander-In-Chief? I can totally see that, so he could claim a "Big Win!" that he arranged himself and didn't need his Secretary of Defense for.

I know more about ISIS than the Generals do, believe me.
Click to expand...


I expect "Niger" will be the new "Benghazi". (Although I wish people could agree on how to pronounce it.)
 
Last edited:
alfaniner said:
I expect "Niger" will be the new "Benghazi". (Although I wish people could agree on how to pronounce it.)
Click to expand...

If I was working for the White House, I would suggest they pronounce it like the French.
That suggests that the mess is the fault and responsibility of the frog-eaters.
 
alfaniner said:
I expect "Niger" will be the new "Benghazi". (Although I wish people could agree on how to pronounce it.)
Click to expand...

I doubt it.

The GOP will suppress any kind of investigation and even if some kind of investigation takes place, the Democrats simply will not make a big deal about it if and when it turns out that it was an operation that just went awry and no-one in the upper reaches of the command structure is culpable.
 
The Don said:
I doubt it.

The GOP will suppress any kind of investigation and even if some kind of investigation takes place, the Democrats simply will not make a big deal about it if and when it turns out that it was an operation that just went awry and no-one in the upper reaches of the command structure is culpable.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure.
The way this administration leaks, it wouldn't surprise me if a memo turns up showing how someone's negligence left the soldiers without air support and poorly equipped.
 
I am going to wait until the evidence is in on Niger.
It could have been a stupid operation that never should have been green lighted.
It could have been a sound military operation where everything went wrong.
There is a huge difference between the two.
You can have a perfectly reasonable military plan,put good people in command, and STILL have everything go wrong.
One thing is sure; In this discussion we will have lots of people souding off who know s--t
about the military. Hint: it ain't like what you see in the movies or tv.
 
President Donald Trump on Thursday gave the federal government the highest marks for its response to the hurricane devastation in Puerto Rico.

“I’d say it was a 10,” the president, who sat beside Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló, told reporters on Thursday. “I’d say it was probably the most difficult when you talk about relief, when you talk about search, when you talk about all of the different levels, and even when you talk about lives saved. You look at the number. I mean, this was — I think it was worse than Katrina.”

The pair of hurricanes that tore through Puerto Rico, the president continued, “was in many ways worse than anything people have ever seen.”

“They got hit by a category 4. Grazed. But grazed about, you know, a big portion of the island,” Trump said. “But it was grazed. The rest of it hit Florida, as you know. But that was bad. But then they got hit dead center — if you look at those maps, by a category 5. Nobody’s ever heard of a [category] 5 hitting land. Usually by that time it’s dissipated. It hit right through — and kept to a [category] 5. It hit right through the middle of the island, right through the middle of Puerto Rico. There’s never been anything like that. I give ourselves a 10.”
Click to expand...

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/19/trump-puerto-rico-response-243948?lo=ap_b1

Trump giving himself the best possible grades of success is all that really matters because Trump is great, in fact he's the greatest at everything ever. He knows greatness when he sees it because he's greatness incarnate.
 
They got hit by a category 4. Grazed. But grazed about, you know, a big portion of the island,” Trump said. “But it was grazed. The rest of it hit Florida, as you know. But that was bad. But then they got hit dead center — if you look at those maps, by a category 5.
Click to expand...

Gods, he's such a terrible speaker.
 
Islamophobia runs deep in the administration.

Since federal courts first enjoined President Donald Trump’s Muslim travel ban, lawyers for his administration have been at pains to insist that anti-Muslim animus is not a driving force of policymaking in his government.

But an internal White House document, obtained exclusively by Crooked Media, suggests that the reach of Islamophobia among Trump administration aides and advisers stretches far beyond the four corners of the travel ban, into the budget-writing process, where the White House’s full agenda comes together. The document also reflects the extent to which the White House policymaking process, conducted in the shadow of the media circus around Trump himself—from family planning to federal hiring to nutritional assistance—is defined by ideological extremism, and tempered by incompetence.

Policymakers in Trump’s White House*argue that the U.S. should refrain from influencing curricula and “other touchier-feelier programs” at foreign institutions that receive federal funds to educate young girls—except in “muslim countries, where we need to do a check of the curricula at the schools we’re supporting to weed out jihadism.”

Though not as nakedly discriminatory as Trump’s 2015 call for a “complete and total shutdown of Muslims” entering the United States, this new proposal, like the travel ban, envisions a double standard in the application of policy toward people and institutions on the basis of whether their home countries are majority Muslim or not.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom