Paco Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Are George W. Bush and Tony Blair "fascist dictators", in that case? Indeed, is Hillary Clinton, or any other US Secretary of State who has ordered dozens of airstrikes where families of suspected terrorists and civilians are killed and accepted as collateral damage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 And not even counted, it's the express policy of us and the USA since Iraq not to even count civilian dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poo Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Yet, despite this. The UK Government can't help but cozy up to them, along with Saudi Arabia. So the UK can't take the moral high ground either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lambies Doos Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Is hillary in the big hoose yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poo Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said: Is hillary in the big hoose yet? She doesn't strike me as a fan of The Rangers, but you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Parr Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 25 minutes ago, Paco said: Well, quite. His behaviour on the campaign trail has shown he's incredibly shallow, easy to rile and can change his mind at the drop of a hat. But if we're taking him at his word on the proposed Muslim ban, his actual current policy is increased checks on people visiting from "compromised" countries. Which to be honest they already do anyway. Try getting into the US with an Iranian stamp on your passport. Whatever his current policy is, I just wonder how many votes he carried on the strength of the muslim ban and how those folk are going to react when he wholly fails to follow through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poo Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Consolidate said: Whatever his current policy is, I just wonder how many votes he carried on the strength of the muslim ban and how those folk are going to react when he wholly fails to follow through. Not to mention failing to lock up the "corrupt criminal". I genuinely fear for her life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Parr Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Just now, Poo said: Not to mention failing to lock up the "corrupt criminal". I genuinely fear for her life. And when he fails to have Mexico pay for a 1000 mile wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 41 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said: No you didn't. If you're not paying attention it's not anybody elses fault but yours. Apologies. You are correct, I haven't previously asked you but not that I have I assume you have plenty to provide. Given that you knew and it was all over the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poo Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Just now, Consolidate said: And when he fails to have Mexico pay for a 1000 mile wall He'll fail to do a lot of things. But the gun happy fuckers will find a way of blaming it on the Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 The hope is that he doesn't believe this crap and that he was only using it as rhetoric to rule up the disillusioned workers in Michigan. The hope has to be that he's ideologically vacuous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poo Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Just now, Savage Henry said: The hope is that he doesn't believe this crap and that he was only using it as rhetoric to rule up the disillusioned workers in Michigan. The hope has to be that he's ideologically vacuous. In that case, it's false hope. Anybody that knew Trump before he ran for president will tell you that he has always held highly controversial views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehawhehaw Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Poo said: He'll fail to do a lot of things. But the gun happy fuckers will find a way of blaming it on the Democrats. Yes, he will just ask sturgeon how she gets away with blaming everything on W.M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poo Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Just now, hehawhehaw said: Yes, he will just ask sturgeon how she gets away with blaming everything on W.M. In which she'll explain, it has to actually be true first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 As with during the entire election, plenty of vile and violent behavior against Trump supporters going around. Killary and the MSM need brought to task for inciting this with their lies and divisive rhetoric, and of course funding many of the protests and violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 In that case, it's false hope. Anybody that knew Trump before he ran for president will tell you that he has always held highly controversial views. There's no way he's going to ban all Muslims, and the Mexicans will never pay for the damn wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 35 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said: I honour the bit of advice, fucking idiots like you, stooped to give to the rest of the UK. Now let's put the proposals for enacting that "advice" through a proper parliamentary process and if it turns out to be nonsense/unworkable then you ken whit? It won't pass and we'll stay, or not leave, whatever. That you've been led up the garden path thinking the frankly ridiculous notion that we could "just leave the EU" like fucking magic, is tragic for you, nobody likes to be taken for a ride, I get that. But that's your problem. So much anger. You were on the losing side and I get that but snotters, tears and toys out the pram aren't going to make you feel any better. Let's not bother putting constraining the negotiating position of the UK with this pantomime on triggering article 50, let's allow the government to get on with doing what they were elected to do - represent the interests of the UK. Once there is consensus with the EU on what form withdrawal can be achieved then we can put it to a vote and go through the parliamentary process. Your last paragraph is utterly ridiculous. There is only one side that is having a problem with this result and it isn't Leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, strichener said: So much anger. You were on the losing side and I get that but snotters, tears and toys out the pram aren't going to make you feel any better. Let's not bother putting constraining the negotiating position of the UK with this pantomime on triggering article 50, let's allow the government to get on with doing what they were elected to do - represent the interests of the UK. Once there is consensus with the EU on what form withdrawal can be achieved then we can put it to a vote and go through the parliamentary process. Your last paragraph is utterly ridiculous. There is only one side that is having a problem with this result and it isn't Leave. Yeah bollocks son, here's a comprehensive report into all the shit we don't know, but should and is a disgrace that we don't. But you're quite happy to plow on blind, dumb and apparently deaf because you think you've won, something. One assumes for the first time? http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7761 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, Savage Henry said: There's no way he's going to ban all Muslims, and the Mexicans will never pay for the damn wall. After the Muslim thing, he was asked about it in a lot more detail and pretty much said there would be an exemption for almost everything. He'll fulfill this pledge by reducing the refugee program and then boast that that's what he always meant. The wall thing won't happen either. What he'll just do there is take the parts of construction that Bush and Obama have committed to in securing the border and then say it was achieved on his watch. The current fence will become a 'high tech super advanced modern wall' or some shit and Mexico will be said to pay for it through some sort of change in tax law or tariff. The Iran nuclear deal will probably remain but when pressed on it, he'll give some guff about being a businessman and inheriting this contract but renegotiating parts of it and finding loopholes. Most of his pledges were based on fantasy anyway (like completely lying about the crime rate) so it will be easy enough for him to present facts in a few years and claim he's performed some sort of miracle. My biggest worry about his presidency is climate change and foreign policy. Climate change legislation has no real safeguards in the same way as international agreements and there are a lot of nutters in both houses and big money interests which would favour seeing all the progress Obama (Bush and Clinton too) has made completely destroyed. My worry with him and foreign policy is that he appoints a nutter to represent the US abroad and brings us (allies) into really avoidable disputes. It will be interesting though to see how his spending plans go. He's pretty much pledged the biggest increase in spending of any president in modern times and tax cuts everywhere. With Republicans always winging at Obama for having a big deficit (which is absolute bullshit tbh), I don't know how it'll play to them when he proposes such massive infrastructure projects. It could be a very interesting experiment but I suspect that a lot of the money will never see it's intended recipients. It is an easy way to inflate things in the short term and guarantee massive growth (that lasts until the 2020 election) and then see a massive crash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 40 minutes ago, Paco said: Are George W. Bush and Tony Blair "fascist dictators", in that case? Indeed, is Hillary Clinton, or any other US Secretary of State who has ordered dozens of airstrikes where families of suspected terrorists and civilians are killed and accepted as collateral damage? The extra judicial killings by the USA and Britain are often wrong yes. I'd also suggest that there's a moral difference between killing people as part of collateral damage and going after people independently specifically because they are related to a terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.