Trump, Russia and War on Terrorism...What's the Problem

[Bush92]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

 

[Bleipriester]

But Trump "fights" terror now with Saudi Arabia. And so did Obama. The result are powerful terrorist armies.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

Wait, the US and Russia working together to stop global terrorism? Er... what the fuck?

Russia destroyed Grozny and made the Muslims in Russia hate the Russians.

The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, bombed Libya, played with Syria, sanctions against Iran and all of that.

And now they want to stop the shit they made? Why? It's too convenient for them.

Yeah, they don't want to stop global terrorism, they want to FIGHT IT, because fighting it requires lots of expensive weapons, which allow for lots of expensive kick backs for politicians, it also allows them to put fear into the hearts of the people so they'll buy this bullshit.

 

[Bleipriester]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

Wait, the US and Russia working together to stop global terrorism? Er... what the fuck?

Russia destroyed Grozny and made the Muslims in Russia hate the Russians.

The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, bombed Libya, played with Syria, sanctions against Iran and all of that.

And now they want to stop the shit they made? Why? It's too convenient for them.

Yeah, they don't want to stop global terrorism, they want to FIGHT IT, because fighting it requires lots of expensive weapons, which allow for lots of expensive kick backs for politicians, it also allows them to put fear into the hearts of the people so they'll buy this bullshit.

Russia´s actions in Syria will not only help to defeat terrorism but it grants Russia skyrocketing arms sales. I think there might even be a + at the end of the war.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

Wait, the US and Russia working together to stop global terrorism? Er... what the fuck?

Russia destroyed Grozny and made the Muslims in Russia hate the Russians.

The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, bombed Libya, played with Syria, sanctions against Iran and all of that.

And now they want to stop the shit they made? Why? It's too convenient for them.

Yeah, they don't want to stop global terrorism, they want to FIGHT IT, because fighting it requires lots of expensive weapons, which allow for lots of expensive kick backs for politicians, it also allows them to put fear into the hearts of the people so they'll buy this bullshit.

Russia´s actions in Syria will not only help to defeat terrorism but it grants Russia skyrocketing arms sales. I think there might even be a + at the end of the war.

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

 

[Bleipriester]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

Wait, the US and Russia working together to stop global terrorism? Er... what the fuck?

Russia destroyed Grozny and made the Muslims in Russia hate the Russians.

The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, bombed Libya, played with Syria, sanctions against Iran and all of that.

And now they want to stop the shit they made? Why? It's too convenient for them.

Yeah, they don't want to stop global terrorism, they want to FIGHT IT, because fighting it requires lots of expensive weapons, which allow for lots of expensive kick backs for politicians, it also allows them to put fear into the hearts of the people so they'll buy this bullshit.

Russia´s actions in Syria will not only help to defeat terrorism but it grants Russia skyrocketing arms sales. I think there might even be a + at the end of the war.

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

It is because the terrorists have oh so legit backers like the Gulf states, Turkey, Israel and many western countries, mainly the US, the UK and France.

 

[Syriusly]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide.

What liberal criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism?

Specifically?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

Wait, the US and Russia working together to stop global terrorism? Er... what the fuck?

Russia destroyed Grozny and made the Muslims in Russia hate the Russians.

The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, bombed Libya, played with Syria, sanctions against Iran and all of that.

And now they want to stop the shit they made? Why? It's too convenient for them.

Yeah, they don't want to stop global terrorism, they want to FIGHT IT, because fighting it requires lots of expensive weapons, which allow for lots of expensive kick backs for politicians, it also allows them to put fear into the hearts of the people so they'll buy this bullshit.

Russia´s actions in Syria will not only help to defeat terrorism but it grants Russia skyrocketing arms sales. I think there might even be a + at the end of the war.

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

It is because the terrorists have oh so legit backers like the Gulf states, Turkey, Israel and many western countries, mainly the US, the UK and France.

Oh, okay, so... you say terrorism is going to stop, I say it isn't, and then you give the reasons why it isn't going to stop. Er... okay then. So we agree it isn't going to stop.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

??? What did you say that you think has to do with the strategy and tactics of waging asymmetric battle?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

??? What did you say that you think has to do with the strategy and tactics of waging asymmetric battle?

Nothing. Do I have to respond to every damn thing you say?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

??? What did you say that you think has to do with the strategy and tactics of waging asymmetric battle?

Nothing. Do I have to respond to every damn thing you say?

No. I simply asked if you cared to remark upon the other bullet point. "No" would have been a perfectly acceptable reply to that question, and, apparently, a more accurate one than "I did."

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

??? What did you say that you think has to do with the strategy and tactics of waging asymmetric battle?

Nothing. Do I have to respond to every damn thing you say?

No. I simply asked if you cared to remark upon the other bullet point. "No" would have been a perfectly acceptable reply to that question, and, apparently, a more accurate one than "I did."

Well, it's funny, because I replied to your post, and now this is your third fucking post and you haven't bothered to speak about what I said. Oh fucking jezus....

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

And that won't happen any time soon because the large nations know they can bully the smaller nations. In fact the right in Russia, China, the US demand their governments bully.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

??? What did you say that you think has to do with the strategy and tactics of waging asymmetric battle?

Nothing. Do I have to respond to every damn thing you say?

No. I simply asked if you cared to remark upon the other bullet point. "No" would have been a perfectly acceptable reply to that question, and, apparently, a more accurate one than "I did."

Well, it's funny, because I replied to your post, and now this is your third fucking post and you haven't bothered to speak about what I said. Oh fucking jezus....

There isn't anything I care to say about it. Were you awaiting overt approbation or something over the patently obvious soupçon of a conclusion you had to share? Fine; I agreed with your remark about what "big" countries bullying "smaller" ones.

I replied to your post

Yes, you did. It was a two bullet point post that I wrote and your reply to it had substance pertaining to one of the points. I merely asked if you cared to address the other one. As I said, "no" would have been a perfectly fine answer and it would have been a more accurate one than saying "I did," which is the response you gave to the question of whether you cared to address the other bullet point. Shortly thereafter, you then inform us that nothing you had written pertained to the topic of the bullet point about which I asked.

 

[Bush92]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide.

What liberal criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism?

Specifically?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/...rump-classified-intelligence-russia.html?_r=0
This garbage.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

• When a better approach to waging asymmetric battles be invented.
• When "big" nations/factions cease to exert their will over that of "small"/non-sovereign ones.

Do you care to address the other bullet point?

I did.

??? What did you say that you think has to do with the strategy and tactics of waging asymmetric battle?

Nothing. Do I have to respond to every damn thing you say?

No. I simply asked if you cared to remark upon the other bullet point. "No" would have been a perfectly acceptable reply to that question, and, apparently, a more accurate one than "I did."

Well, it's funny, because I replied to your post, and now this is your third fucking post and you haven't bothered to speak about what I said. Oh fucking jezus....

There isn't anything I care to say about it. Were you awaiting overt approbation or something over the patently obvious soupçon of a conclusion you had to share? Fine; I agreed with your remark about what "big" countries bullying "smaller" ones.

I replied to your post

Yes, you did. It was a two bullet point post that I wrote and your reply to it had substance pertaining to one of the points. I merely asked if you cared to address the other one. As I said, "no" would have been a perfectly fine answer and it would have been a more accurate one than saying "I did," which is the response you gave to the question of whether you cared to address the other bullet point. Shortly thereafter, you then inform us that nothing you had written pertained to the topic of the bullet point about which I asked.

So, I don't on here for these informal chats. Bye.

 

[Bleipriester]

Liberals criticism of Trump for working with Russia to stop global terrorism is dangerous to security of innocent people worldwide. Why hinder these efforts through obstructionist news media reporting on unsubstantiated stories.
Tucker: Dems whining about Russia, but terror is the enemy

Wait, the US and Russia working together to stop global terrorism? Er... what the fuck?

Russia destroyed Grozny and made the Muslims in Russia hate the Russians.

The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, bombed Libya, played with Syria, sanctions against Iran and all of that.

And now they want to stop the shit they made? Why? It's too convenient for them.

Yeah, they don't want to stop global terrorism, they want to FIGHT IT, because fighting it requires lots of expensive weapons, which allow for lots of expensive kick backs for politicians, it also allows them to put fear into the hearts of the people so they'll buy this bullshit.

Russia´s actions in Syria will not only help to defeat terrorism but it grants Russia skyrocketing arms sales. I think there might even be a + at the end of the war.

Yeah, so when is this terrorism going to stop?

Because every fucking time the big countries go in to stop terrorism, we end up with more terrorism. So why isn't it getting less then?

It is because the terrorists have oh so legit backers like the Gulf states, Turkey, Israel and many western countries, mainly the US, the UK and France.

Oh, okay, so... you say terrorism is going to stop, I say it isn't, and then you give the reasons why it isn't going to stop. Er... okay then. So we agree it isn't going to stop.

This shit would have stopped, no, it would not have started in the first place without that backers.