Time to Call Obama and Kerry What They Are Traitors

[Bfgrn]

Who knows, they have no weapons right now do they?

LOL...obfuscation...I knew you wouldn't answer a straight forward question...

I did as best as it was presented. I cannot fix you or your need to have information spoon fed to you. Please go back and think about how to ask your question.

It can't be asked in a more simple way. This treaty forbids Iran from having a nuclear weapon.

Iran is more dangerous:

1) with nuclear weapons

2) without nuclear weapons

Iran does not currently possess any nuclear weapons so I cannot address that with any certainty. While Iran is a sworn enemy of the US and would like to see it's destruction Iran also is mindful of it's own survival and would not risk starting a nuclear war. Iran also has to be careful as their allies Russia and China may not support them if they chose to take the offensive and attack the US.

I accept your surrender...

 

[Bfgrn]

What would you call a man who testified to Congress while the US was still actively engaged in armed conflict in Vietnam?

John Kerry testimony

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."

I would call him a traitor as there is no doubt that he was aiding and abetting the enemy.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

 

[TooTall]

What would you call a man who testified to Congress while the US was still actively engaged in armed conflict in Vietnam?

John Kerry testimony

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."

I would call him a traitor as there is no doubt that he was aiding and abetting the enemy.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

You obviously have not served in the military or you would know the difference between a traitor and a patriot.

 

[Bfgrn]

What would you call a man who testified to Congress while the US was still actively engaged in armed conflict in Vietnam?

John Kerry testimony

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."

I would call him a traitor as there is no doubt that he was aiding and abetting the enemy.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

You obviously have not served in the military or you would know the difference between a traitor and a patriot.

When did rape, torture and baby killing become American values Too SMALL??

 

[Hawkeye2j]

The biggest problem with this country right now is the military industrial complex attempting to keep this country in perpetual war. And then who oppose it and try to bring peace are called traitors. Kerry was a hero for calling out the atrocities. And he was called to testify he had to tell the truth. Americans are finally recognizing the right wing idiocy and are rejecting it. That is the reason for the Bernie Sanders surge.

 

[Bfgrn]

1ST MARINE DIVISION
MODERATOR. I'd like to welcome you all. This is the First Marine Division. It landed in South Vietnam in 1965 and is still there. You've probably all heard the quotation "Ask a Marine." So after these gentlemen have finished their testimony, you'll be allowed to ask a Marine and find out what really went on over there.

CRAIG. My name is Stephen Craig. I'm 23 years old. I entered the service about two weeks after graduation in 1965. I entered the service after high school in 1965. Went to Vietnam in 1966 to serve with Second Battalion, 5th Marine and served there from September '66 to September '67. When I got out of the service I worked as a laborer. My testimony basically covers the maltreatment of prisoners, the suspects actually, and a convoy running down an old woman with no reason at all--no provocation or anything. And bounties were put on our own men in our own companies if they were inadequate in the field. And they were either disposed of, or wounded, or something to this effect just to make sure they were taken away. I was a Pfc. in the service.

MODERATOR. We're going to allow everybody to speak first and after that the press will be allowed to ask questions.

SACHS. My name is Rusty Sachs. I entered the Marine Corps in 1964 after working as a news broadcaster for a network radio station. I was a helicopter pilot. I came out as a Captain. I was in Vietnam with Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 362 as a medivac pilot from August of '66 to September of '67 and my testimony concerns the leveling of villages for no valid reason, throwing Viet Cong suspects from the aircraft after binding and gagging them with copper wire, and racism in the assignment of priorities to medical evacuations where white people were given priority over nonwhite people.

CAMILE. My name is Scott Camile. I was a Sgt. attached to Charley 1/1. I was a forward observer in Vietnam. I went in right after high school and I'm a student now. My testimony involves burning of villages with civilians in them, the cutting off of ears, cutting off of heads, torturing of prisoners, calling in of artillery on villages for games, corpsmen killing wounded prisoners, napalm dropped on villages, women being raped, women and children being massacred, CS gas used on people, animals slaughtered, Chieu Hoi passes rejected and the people holding them shot, bodies shoved out of helicopters, tear-gassing people for fun and running civilian vehicles off the road.

CAMPBELL. My name is Kenneth J. Campbell. I'm 21. I'm a Philadelphia resident. I was a Corporal in the Marine Corps. I was an FO, Forward Artillery Scout Observer. I FO'd for Bravo Company, First Battalion, First Marine Regiment, First Marine Division. I was in Vietnam from February of '68 to March of '69. I went straight into the Marine Corps from high school and I am now a student at Temple University in Philadelphia. My testimony will consist of eyewitnessing and participating in the calling in of artillery on undefended villages, mutilation of bodies, killing of civilians, mistreatment of civilians, mistreatment of prisoners and indiscriminate use of artillery, harassment and interdiction fire.

SIMPSON. My name is Chris Simpson. Age 21; of New York. I was a Corporal in the U.S. Marine Corps from '66 to '70. I was in Vietnam from '67 to '68. I'll be talking about maltreating of prisoners, destruction of villages, crops and animals. I was attached to Echo Company, Second Battalion, 5th Marines.

OLIMPIERI. My name is Paul Olimpieri. I entered the Marine Corps about nine months after graduating high school. I was in 1st Battalion, 5th Marines in Vietnam and my testimony is on killing civilians and killing livestock and destroying villages.

NIENKE. My name is Fred Nienke. I joined the Marine Corps shortly after graduating from high school in 1966. I went to Vietnam and was assigned to Delta, 1st Battalion, 5th Marines. My testimony includes killing of non-combatants, destruction of Vietnamese property and livestock, use of chemical agents and the use of torture in interpreting prisoners.

BISHOP. My name is David Bishop. I was attached to Hotel Company Two Five. Before I went into the Marine Corps I was a lab technician. I'm still a lab technician. My testimony is going to consist of my skipper, or my captain, killing prisoners, throwing heat tablets or trioxylene gas to children, four NVA nurses that were captured--were POWs--were raped, tortured and then were completely destroyed--their bodies were destroyed--and free fire zones and health problems in Vietnam.

BANGERT. My name is Joe Bangert. I'm a Philadelphia resident. I enlisted in the Marine Corps for four years in 1967. I went to Vietnam in 1968. My unit in Vietnam was Marine Observation Squadron Six with the First Marine Air Wing and my testimony will cover the slaughter of civilians, the skinning of a Vietnamese woman, the type of observing our squadron did in Vietnam and the crucifixion of Vietnamese either suspects or civilians in Vietnam.

BRONAUGH. My name is Jack Bronaugh. I joined the Marine Corps about six months after getting out of high school. I was 18 years of age at the time. I enlisted for four years. I went to Vietnam in February of '68. I served with Echo Battery 213 attached to 2nd Battalion, 27th Marines. Mainly my testimony is about the indiscriminate murder of, in a sense, civilian women and children, torture of prisoners for fun and other reasons.

KENNY. Michael Kenny. Joined the Marine Corps at the age of 17 in '68. Served in Vietnam '69-'70, Second Battalion, 26th Marines. My testimony mainly concerns the maltreatment and murder of Vietnamese non-combatants and the general maltreatment of the civilian population.

DELAY. My name is Kevin Delay. I entered the Marine Corps shortly after graduating from high school. I served in Vietnam with 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines from October 1969 to March 1970. My testimony concerns the falsification of body count reports.

ECKERT. My name is Ted Eckert. I'm 21 years old and I'm a resident of Las Vegas, Nevada. I entered the Marine Corps in March 1968 and was sent to Nam July of the following year. I was attached to Marine Wing Support Group 17, 1st Marine Air Wing. My testimony deals with harassment fire from the air, burning of villages from the air, and black marketeering in Da Nang itself.

Continue Reading Testimony

 

[Alex.]

Who knows, they have no weapons right now do they?

LOL...obfuscation...I knew you wouldn't answer a straight forward question...

I did as best as it was presented. I cannot fix you or your need to have information spoon fed to you. Please go back and think about how to ask your question.

It can't be asked in a more simple way. This treaty forbids Iran from having a nuclear weapon.

Iran is more dangerous:

1) with nuclear weapons

2) without nuclear weapons

Iran does not currently possess any nuclear weapons so I cannot address that with any certainty. While Iran is a sworn enemy of the US and would like to see it's destruction Iran also is mindful of it's own survival and would not risk starting a nuclear war. Iran also has to be careful as their allies Russia and China may not support them if they chose to take the offensive and attack the US.

I accept your surrender...

I accept that your cognitive skills are limited and you cannot form your own opinions.

 

[TooTall]

What would you call a man who testified to Congress while the US was still actively engaged in armed conflict in Vietnam?

John Kerry testimony

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."

I would call him a traitor as there is no doubt that he was aiding and abetting the enemy.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

You obviously have not served in the military or you would know the difference between a traitor and a patriot.

When did rape, torture and baby killing become American values Too SMALL??

The military deals with it, but I wouldn't expect you to know that.

 

[Liminal]

For almost fifty years, John Kerry has been selling out American interests to the enemy. Iran is his biggest success. The dirty Iran nuke deal is the culmination of his life’s many treasons.

And none of this would have happened without Obama.

Obama began his rise by pandering to radical leftists on removing Saddam. He urged them to take on Egypt instead, and that’s what he did once in office, orchestrating the takeover of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and across the region. The Muslim Brotherhood was overthrown by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, but Obama had preserved the Iranian regime when it was faced with the Green Revolution. Now Iran is his last best Islamist hope for stopping America in the Middle East.

What scum!


Time to Call Obama and Kerry What They Are Traitors Frontpage Mag

It's time to call traitors like you by their real name too........just plain fucking stupid.

 

[Bfgrn]

LOL...obfuscation...I knew you wouldn't answer a straight forward question...

I did as best as it was presented. I cannot fix you or your need to have information spoon fed to you. Please go back and think about how to ask your question.

It can't be asked in a more simple way. This treaty forbids Iran from having a nuclear weapon.

Iran is more dangerous:

1) with nuclear weapons

2) without nuclear weapons

Iran does not currently possess any nuclear weapons so I cannot address that with any certainty. While Iran is a sworn enemy of the US and would like to see it's destruction Iran also is mindful of it's own survival and would not risk starting a nuclear war. Iran also has to be careful as their allies Russia and China may not support them if they chose to take the offensive and attack the US.

I accept your surrender...

I accept that your cognitive skills are limited and you cannot form your own opinions.

If you don't know my opinion by now, then you have zero cognitive skills.

 

[Bfgrn]

What would you call a man who testified to Congress while the US was still actively engaged in armed conflict in Vietnam?

John Kerry testimony

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."

I would call him a traitor as there is no doubt that he was aiding and abetting the enemy.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

You obviously have not served in the military or you would know the difference between a traitor and a patriot.

When did rape, torture and baby killing become American values Too SMALL??

The military deals with it, but I wouldn't expect you to know that.

The military does not "deal" with this without patriots speaking out. And even then the penalties do not match the crimes.

 

[TooTall]

What would you call a man who testified to Congress while the US was still actively engaged in armed conflict in Vietnam?

John Kerry testimony

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."

I would call him a traitor as there is no doubt that he was aiding and abetting the enemy.

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

You obviously have not served in the military or you would know the difference between a traitor and a patriot.

When did rape, torture and baby killing become American values Too SMALL??

The military deals with it, but I wouldn't expect you to know that.

The military does not "deal" with this without patriots speaking out. And even then the penalties do not match the crimes.

How would a traitor like you know that?

 

[skye]

For almost fifty years, John Kerry has been selling out American interests to the enemy. Iran is his biggest success. The dirty Iran nuke deal is the culmination of his life’s many treasons.

And none of this would have happened without Obama.

Obama began his rise by pandering to radical leftists on removing Saddam. He urged them to take on Egypt instead, and that’s what he did once in office, orchestrating the takeover of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and across the region. The Muslim Brotherhood was overthrown by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, but Obama had preserved the Iranian regime when it was faced with the Green Revolution. Now Iran is his last best Islamist hope for stopping America in the Middle East.

What scum!


Time to Call Obama and Kerry What They Are Traitors Frontpage Mag

It's time to call traitors like you by their real name too........just plain fucking stupid.

Thank you for your highly intellectual, rich and informative comment!

It fully demonstrates your great brain power.

 

[Bfgrn]

The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
George Orwell

I would call him a patriot.

But, I am sure any German citizen who spoke out against NAZI atrocities was called a "traitor"

You obviously have not served in the military or you would know the difference between a traitor and a patriot.

When did rape, torture and baby killing become American values Too SMALL??

The military deals with it, but I wouldn't expect you to know that.

The military does not "deal" with this without patriots speaking out. And even then the penalties do not match the crimes.

How would a traitor like you know that?

History...maybe when you are old enough to read...

 

[Alex.]

"Is support for the Iran deal dropping? It appears so.

Just two weeks after it was struck, Americans appear to be taking an increasingly negative view of the Iran nuclear deal.

A CNN-ORC poll released Tuesday finds 52 percent of Americans say Congress should reject the deal, while 44 percent want them to approve it. The findings mirror a Pew Research poll released last week and mark the first public polls this year to find majority or plurality opposition to a deal with Iran."

Is support for the Iran deal dropping It appears so. - The Washington Post

Seems people are having "buyers remorse" on this deal. Once they realized Obama supports state sponsored terrorism they had a change of heart.

 

[Bfgrn]

"Is support for the Iran deal dropping? It appears so.

Just two weeks after it was struck, Americans appear to be taking an increasingly negative view of the Iran nuclear deal.

A CNN-ORC poll released Tuesday finds 52 percent of Americans say Congress should reject the deal, while 44 percent want them to approve it. The findings mirror a Pew Research poll released last week and mark the first public polls this year to find majority or plurality opposition to a deal with Iran."

Is support for the Iran deal dropping It appears so. - The Washington Post

Seems people are having "buyers remorse" on this deal. Once they realized Obama supports state sponsored terrorism they had a change of heart.

No, just stupid people like you oppose it. It is what your handlers are telling you to parrot...

The new poll finds a sharp partisan gap on whether Congress should approve the deal, with 66% of Republicans and 55% of independents saying Congress ought to reject it and 61% of Democrats saying it should be approved. Younger adults, who tend to lean more Democratic, are more apt to favor the deal: 53% of those age 18-34 say approve it, while 56% of those age 35 or older say reject it. There is also an education divide on the deal, with 53% of college graduates saying the deal should be approved, while just 37% of those with a high school degree or less formal education saying they think it should be approved.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

"Is support for the Iran deal dropping? It appears so.

Just two weeks after it was struck, Americans appear to be taking an increasingly negative view of the Iran nuclear deal.

A CNN-ORC poll released Tuesday finds 52 percent of Americans say Congress should reject the deal, while 44 percent want them to approve it. The findings mirror a Pew Research poll released last week and mark the first public polls this year to find majority or plurality opposition to a deal with Iran."

Is support for the Iran deal dropping It appears so. - The Washington Post

Seems people are having "buyers remorse" on this deal. Once they realized Obama supports state sponsored terrorism they had a change of heart.

Actually like you, the large majority of older Americans don't have an alternative that is valid or better than this deal. The right wing clamoring and false complaints do have an effect on the "over thirty five" and the "less educated" public opinion.


from your link to the CNN-ORC poll:

Younger adults, who tend to lean more Democratic, are more apt to favor the deal: 53% of those age 18-34 say approve it, while 56% of those age 35 or older say reject it. There is also an education divide on the deal, with 53% of college graduates saying the deal should be approved, while just 37% of those with a high school degree or less formal education saying they think it should be approved

.
The deal is a ten to twenty year look-ahead giving a diplomatic solution a chance rather than military action. Why not let the younger Americans decide their future. Its not as if from 2000 on the 'adults' did such a bang up job specifically on foreign policy with Iraq and lousy economic policy from 2000 through 2007 during the Bush years.

I will wait for the poll that asks the more pertinent question ( Majority Of Americans Support Iran Nuclear Deal ) rather than this skewed question on in the CNN-ORC poll. Skewed because it only asks if Congress should approve it, not whether it is preferable to war with Iran or not or continuing sanctons?

This poll asked "As you may know, the U.S. Congress must approve the agreement the United States and five other
countries reached with Iran that is aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons before it can take effect. Do you think Congress should approve or reject the deal with Iran? July 22-25 2015"

The most pertinent question and answers were taken and given just one week ago when folks were also asked if Congress should approve it and a 53% majority said yes. Quite a swing in a week. But its research went deeper than the poll you have selected:

The survey also offered Americans an opportunity to select which one of several policy options would be “most effective” in reducing the likelihood Iran develops nuclear weapons. Doing so found a plurality -40%— think the Iran nuclear agreement would be more effective than taking military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities (23%), imposing new economic sanctions against Iran (23%) or continuing existing sanctions against Iran (12%).

How would you answer that question? It a no brainer that diplomacy is preferred over war = unless you are a war monger.

 

[Liminal]

For almost fifty years, John Kerry has been selling out American interests to the enemy. Iran is his biggest success. The dirty Iran nuke deal is the culmination of his life’s many treasons.

And none of this would have happened without Obama.

Obama began his rise by pandering to radical leftists on removing Saddam. He urged them to take on Egypt instead, and that’s what he did once in office, orchestrating the takeover of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and across the region. The Muslim Brotherhood was overthrown by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, but Obama had preserved the Iranian regime when it was faced with the Green Revolution. Now Iran is his last best Islamist hope for stopping America in the Middle East.

What scum!


Time to Call Obama and Kerry What They Are Traitors Frontpage Mag

Why do you bother posting childish nonsense like this? You sound just like some of those idiot GOP Senators holding hearings on the Iran nuclear deal. Are they stupid or simply dishonest? They don't like the deal, but they don't have any alternatives of their own. They keep talking about continuing sanctions. Question for Republican morons: How do sanctions work if our allies don't cooperate? How will continued sanctions be effective if the United States is the only nation imposing them. How stupid are these Republican assholes?

 

[Vigilante]

Please

 

[Liminal]

Please

Well that answers that question. Republicans are apparently just about this stupid.