Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
wealthier than you, and how much do you give to veterans? considering you are a liberal you by nature hate veterans, hell, you hate anyone that is not working to destroy this country.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- he11 , no way that i would attempt to prove anything to my Enemies . Let them rot as they speculate . Thats my reasoning in approving of TRUMP keeping his tax returns to himself . Wot , Trump looking for approval from enemies is laughable RWinger ..;I think the obvious wealth he has backs it up.
If nothing else he is a far more talented businessman than you could ever hope to be.
What is obvious?
Most Trump properties are only leasing the name and are not owned by Trump
The businesses actually owned by Trump reportedly carry massive debt
Oh, I see, but when you want to prove he is a bad businessman, you will point to those very same properties and claim he ran them bankrupt?
tell me again oh hillary **** dust sniffer, how does that work
Given that Trumps ONLY qualification is how great a businessman he is
Seems strange he won't release any documentation to prove it
OK
I speculate that Trump is a house of cards and nowhere near as wealthy as is claimed. I also speculate that he gives little to veterans and is stingy with his charitable giving
------------------------------------------- maybe , no big deal to me . Its Trumps personal PRIVATE business as far as i am concerned RWinger .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- he11 , no way that i would attempt to prove anything to my Enemies . Let them rot as they speculate . Thats my reasoning in approving of TRUMP keeping his tax returns to himself . Wot , Trump looking for approval from enemies is laughable RWinger ..;I think the obvious wealth he has backs it up.
If nothing else he is a far more talented businessman than you could ever hope to be.
What is obvious?
Most Trump properties are only leasing the name and are not owned by Trump
The businesses actually owned by Trump reportedly carry massive debt
Oh, I see, but when you want to prove he is a bad businessman, you will point to those very same properties and claim he ran them bankrupt?
tell me again oh hillary **** dust sniffer, how does that work
Given that Trumps ONLY qualification is how great a businessman he is
Seems strange he won't release any documentation to prove it
OK
I speculate that Trump is a house of cards and nowhere near as wealthy as is claimed. I also speculate that he gives little to veterans and is stingy with his charitable giving
I'm sure he is, Pismoe. Is someone arguing he isn't rich?-------------------------------- just an observation of mine and morphing is ok with me , morph into any unprovable topic [yammering] that people want to blow hot air at , ok with me . Thing is though that the TRUMP is wealthy by any measurement that is used OldLady .I keep forgetting to check the last page before I post a comment. These things do morph.funny how the original topic has morphed into a TRUMP Wealth topic that really doesn't matter much to most people . Its Obvious to most thoughtful people that the TRUMP is much richer , wealthier than 99 and 9 tenths of the worlds population .
Probably only so much one can find to say about the OP, though. Prophesizing on what Trump would do or how the military would react to him are limited topics.
wealthier than you, and how much do you give to veterans? considering you are a liberal you by nature hate veterans, hell, you hate anyone that is not working to destroy this country.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- he11 , no way that i would attempt to prove anything to my Enemies . Let them rot as they speculate . Thats my reasoning in approving of TRUMP keeping his tax returns to himself . Wot , Trump looking for approval from enemies is laughable RWinger ..;What is obvious?
Most Trump properties are only leasing the name and are not owned by Trump
The businesses actually owned by Trump reportedly carry massive debt
Oh, I see, but when you want to prove he is a bad businessman, you will point to those very same properties and claim he ran them bankrupt?
tell me again oh hillary **** dust sniffer, how does that work
Given that Trumps ONLY qualification is how great a businessman he is
Seems strange he won't release any documentation to prove it
OK
I speculate that Trump is a house of cards and nowhere near as wealthy as is claimed. I also speculate that he gives little to veterans and is stingy with his charitable giving
you have no credibility here. be gone.
we had F16's, and we didn't try, and they lied about benghazi to win reelection. that's where i'm at right now.And who at the WH was even monitoring the situation???Trump would have scrambled F16's to benghazi. they would have gone.
as America, we would at least have tried. there would be no cover up in the aftermath.
You DO realize that F-16's would be useless for close in air support required over there, right? They aren't equipped with weapons that can be fired within 100 ft of friendly troops.
Shoot.................Not even an A-10 would have been able to do the job due to the proximity of the combatants to the friendlies.
The only thing that would have worked would have been a rescue mission with helos and a rescue team. Only trouble is, we didn't have any assets that would have been able to get there in time.
Watch the movie 13 Hours sometime.
Oh that's right they all took off in jets didn't they.
There were plenty of people monitoring the situation. Watch the movie 13 Hours sometime. Originally, they wanted to mount a rescue operation from Sigonella Sicily, but they didn't have the resources available, so they tried to mount another one from farther away (Aviano Italy), but still didn't have enough resources to mount a rescue operation.
The only ones that could have shown up in time were the security detail at the CIA station, but the trouble is, the CIA station chief wouldn't let them go until around 2 and a half hours after the attack began, and by then, it was too late.
If he would have let them go when the attack started, maybe it would have been a much different story and the ambassador would have lived.
Bottom line is, we had no assets close enough to mount a rescue attempt.
i've seen 13 hours, it's pretty hollywood.
President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.
Washington Redskin, no self-respecting soldier would respect the hildabeast. She is despised in the military… FactEven if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.
Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.
He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”
The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.
“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.
Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”
Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values
The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.
“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”
The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.
Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.
“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”
These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”
More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.
This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.
President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.
Jr. Cheney and RumsFAILED sure did.
Washington Redskin, no self-respecting soldier would respect the hildabeast. She is despised in the military… FactEven if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.
Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.
He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”
The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.
“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.
Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”
Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values
The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.
“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”
The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.
Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.
“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”
These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”
More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.
This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.
we're a military coup right now.We might end up with a military coup.Even if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.
Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.
He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”
The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.
“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.
Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”
Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values
The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.
“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”
The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.
Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.
“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”
These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”
More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.
This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.
what's done is done, my problem with benghazi is with the aftermath. the lying, cheating and misrepresenting the truth to win reelection.There was no way of saving the ambassador.Trump would have scrambled F16's to benghazi. they would have gone.
as America, we would at least have tried. there would be no cover up in the aftermath.
"Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don’t think there is any issue with respect to that—they couldn’t." - Republican, Trey Gowdy
what about the others ?There was no way of saving the ambassador.Trump would have scrambled F16's to benghazi. they would have gone.
as America, we would at least have tried. there would be no cover up in the aftermath.
"Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don’t think there is any issue with respect to that—they couldn’t." - Republican, Trey Gowdy
??The democrat answer is to ground the air force.President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.
Why would Trump procure parts for 40 year old airframes?
Our air force is the most powerful in the world under the Dems
well that's a thing, because bill clinton "ducked" viet nam,If they followed a Kenyan goat herder Im pretty sure they will follow a Patriotic American
What has Trump ever done that is patriotic?
Kind of ducked out on Vietnam didn't he?
But the reality of your example is that Bill Clinton was mentally insane and unfit for military duty.well that's a thing, because bill clinton "ducked" viet nam and went on to hit on and bully his 22 years female intern in the oval office.... so we can talk about that.If they followed a Kenyan goat herder Im pretty sure they will follow a Patriotic American
What has Trump ever done that is patriotic?
Kind of ducked out on Vietnam didn't he?
------------------------------------------------- trust fund babies are fine . The old man does good and the kid inherits it and adds to it if he likes [his choice'. I smell jealousy in this here thread !!wealthier than you, and how much do you give to veterans? considering you are a liberal you by nature hate veterans, hell, you hate anyone that is not working to destroy this country.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- he11 , no way that i would attempt to prove anything to my Enemies . Let them rot as they speculate . Thats my reasoning in approving of TRUMP keeping his tax returns to himself . Wot , Trump looking for approval from enemies is laughable RWinger ..;
Oh, I see, but when you want to prove he is a bad businessman, you will point to those very same properties and claim he ran them bankrupt?
tell me again oh hillary **** dust sniffer, how does that work
Given that Trumps ONLY qualification is how great a businessman he is
Seems strange he won't release any documentation to prove it
OK
I speculate that Trump is a house of cards and nowhere near as wealthy as is claimed. I also speculate that he gives little to veterans and is stingy with his charitable giving
you have no credibility here. be gone.
Yup....Millionaire trust fund babies do tend to be wealthier than I am
It's what is called being born on third base..........Republicans love to run them for President. Look at the two Bush's, McCain, Romney and now Trump
bill clinton is a disturbed man, like anthony weiner.But the reality of your example is that Bill Clinton was mentally insane and unfit for military duty.well that's a thing, because bill clinton "ducked" viet nam and went on to hit on and bully his 22 years female intern in the oval office.... so we can talk about that.If they followed a Kenyan goat herder Im pretty sure they will follow a Patriotic American
What has Trump ever done that is patriotic?
Kind of ducked out on Vietnam didn't he?
One didn't need a doctors note to prove that either, all they had to do was look at what he married. No man in his right mind would do that.
Even if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.
Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.
He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”
The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.
“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.
Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”
Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values
The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.
“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”
The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.
Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.
“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”
These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.
“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”
More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.
This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.
