Eisegerwind Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 2 minutes ago, phart said: No, i imagine the US won't be sending millions of dollars of "non lethal and lethal" aid to ISIS/el nusra/FSA, or when hillary was in charge at best not caring that weapons in Libya were being shipped to jihadists in Syria. Links below to support my two claims. http://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/1.597414 2014 report "...the U.S. had "ramped up its support for the moderate, vetted opposition, providing lethal and non-lethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3774 Speculation about how much Hillary knew about Syria. http://www.globalresearch.ca/wikileaks-says-they-have-1700-emails-proving-hillary-clinton-knew-about-u-s-military-weapons-shipments-to-al-qaeda-and-isis/5541014 I imagine the people of Syria might be liking going back to before the Civil War as much as it irks you. No, it doesn't irk me, it was what I was meaning, I'm sure the people of Syria would much prefer the situation 4/5 years ago. I think sometimes my limited vocab and sarcy posts get interpreted a bit wrong sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 22 minutes ago, Eisegerwind said: No, it doesn't irk me, it was what I was meaning, I'm sure the people of Syria would much prefer the situation 4/5 years ago. I think sometimes my limited vocab and sarcy posts get interpreted a bit wrong sometimes. Ah right i thought you were complaining about it going back, my mistake for misinterpreting. Aye agreed, they need some succour from the last 4 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eisegerwind Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 Yeah, I've had a few beers, but you see the 'liberation' of Aleppo. F'ck sake. I try to not to place myself in their situation but to place there situation in my place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 6, 2016 Share Posted December 6, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/06/he-got-up-there-and-lied-his-a-off-carrier-union-leader-on-trumps-big-deal/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.0b3acde08eb4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 Wow stock markets do seem to like the prospect of President Trump. Fill your boots is my recommendation. I think we are on the cusp of a new boom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Giuliani rules himself out of public office. Meaning he sensibly will be an adviser and not front of shop. Another very deft move IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 (edited) On 09/12/2016 at 10:48 PM, thplinth said: Another very deft move IMO. As deft as Rex Tillerson ? Forgetting his links with Putin, appointing the Exxon Mobil CEO as your secretary of state (not to mention a third Goldman Sachs executive being on his board) doesnt give any confidence that America's foreign policy being influenced by oil will be ending anytime soon ......... No wonder the stock markets are going up Edited December 11, 2016 by Ally Bongo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, Ally Bongo said: As deft as Rex Tillerson ? The mega successful CEO of the 5th largest business in the world? The guy with an address book of world leaders? The guy who knows how to make deals and get things done? That guy? Yeah deft. In fact it is a coup to take him off Exxon. I LOVE the fact he has great relationship with Putin. Trumps's appointments are in the most superb. (and we do not know if this guy will get State yet but if he does... extra superb.) Edited December 11, 2016 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 (edited) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-backs-cia-view-that-russia-intervened-to-help-trump-win-election/2016/12/16/05b42c0e-c3bf-11e6-9a51-cd56ea1c2bb7_story.html?utm_term=.b9f18668d0f5&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%2Bnation Genuine question (as i still think it's pish) but how could Russia, of all countries in the World, influence an election in , of all places, the USA ? What form would that take ? Is it something to do with discrediting Clinton ? I dont even think that would make that much of a difference as her peccadilloes were already known to just about everyone long before the vote Edited December 16, 2016 by Ally Bongo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 Trump was always gonna win a populist duel with Clinton. The media tried their best to influence the result but they were farting against thunder tbh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 I have never felt surer in my whole life about anything that was a big public event and was genuinely unpredictable than I was about Trump winning. Almost from the start, I just knew. It was locked in. So few folk saw it and just about everyone who did was someone I previously really fhucking hated. This election has changed me. Much more than the Scottish referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Sorry I was talking about media folk. No offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Although now you highlight it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 1 hour ago, Toepoke said: Trump was always gonna win a populist duel with Clinton. The media tried their best to influence the result but they were farting against thunder tbh... 36 minutes ago, thplinth said: I have never felt surer in my whole life about anything that was a big public event and was genuinely unpredictable than I was about Trump winning. Almost from the start, I just knew. It was locked in. So few folk saw it and just about everyone who did was someone I previously really fhucking hated. This election has changed me. Much more than the Scottish referendum. He never won the populist duel, his campaign dude played the electoral colleges like a fiddle. The guy who planed Trump's campaign turned about a 2+ million vote deficit into a win using the current system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Anne Coulter is one example. She saw this as clear as day. I dislike her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, phart said: He never won the populist duel, his campaign dude played the electoral colleges like a fiddle. The guy who planed Trump's campaign turned about a 2+ million vote deficit into a win using the current system. He did what we he needed to win. If the rules had been about the popular vote he would have fought a different campaign and won that one instead. They played the game by the rules. and won.. change the rules and they just play if differently and still win. Edited December 17, 2016 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 2 minutes ago, thplinth said: Anne Coulter is one example. She saw this as clear as day. I dislike her. Dude, Anne Coulter is like a republican president trainer she always says her guy is going to win.It's like listening to buster Douglas trainer before the Tyson fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 1 minute ago, thplinth said: He did what we he needed to win. If the rules had been about the popular vote he would have fought a different campaign and won that one instead. That's my point, it's not some random thing, this was planned meticulously and won despite a huge vote disadvantage. This will be studied, like the way certain battles are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 5 minutes ago, phart said: He never won the populist duel, his campaign dude played the electoral colleges like a fiddle. The guy who planed Trump's campaign turned about a 2+ million vote deficit into a win using the current system. Which kinda alludes to my question Hillary got 2 million more votes than Trump with Russia trying to influence the election (allegedly) How could they influence the electoral collages ? Unless they were using subliminal messaging through the TV im not buying it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Just now, Ally Bongo said: Which kinda alludes to my question Hillary got 2 million more votes than Trump with Russia trying to influence the election (allegedly) How could they influence the electoral collages ? Unless they were using subliminal messaging through the TV im not buying it They targetted certain areas that would enable a electoral college victory, cause they are the mechanism that elects the president not the people, so as long as you get 271 (or whatever it is) you're sorted, the amount of votes is irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 2 minutes ago, phart said: They targetted certain areas that would enable a electoral college victory, cause they are the mechanism that elects the president not the people, so as long as you get 271 (or whatever it is) you're sorted, the amount of votes is irrelevant. I know - sorry - i meant Russia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 7 hours ago, Ally Bongo said: Which kinda alludes to my question Hillary got 2 million more votes than Trump with Russia trying to influence the election (allegedly) How could they influence the electoral collages ? Unless they were using subliminal messaging through the TV im not buying it I'd ignore anything the mainstream media says on Russia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 8 hours ago, phart said: They targetted certain areas that would enable a electoral college victory, cause they are the mechanism that elects the president not the people, so as long as you get 271 (or whatever it is) you're sorted, the amount of votes is irrelevant. Which is pretty much what has happened in UK politics for decades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.