We Need To Talk About Donald

[Forty Two]

Oh here we go again: Secret service being unduly secretive and making up secrets. #FAKE NRWS!!

Trust, and don't bother verifying. Trump has improper links to Russia. Case closed.

[pErvinalia]

Hang the cunt!

[DRSB]

Happy family.

[Hermit]

So much for Bannon as the power behind the President. A couple of weeks ago, Bannon was the true shadow authority behind the administration.... now he's persona non grata, and that's a bad thing... lol

Would you please explain how you concluded that "It's all starting to unravel" means "that's a bad thing"?

[Hermit]

Happy family.

Brilliant analogy.

[Forty Two]

So much for Bannon as the power behind the President. A couple of weeks ago, Bannon was the true shadow authority behind the administration.... now he's persona non grata, and that's a bad thing... lol

Would you please explain how you concluded that "It's all starting to unravel" means "that's a bad thing"?

I didn't conclude that. I didn't respond to any such statement.

EDIT - oh, I see, I did respond right after someone posted "It's all starting to unravel" -- I'll clarify that I wasn't responding to that person. I would normally quote it if I was responding to it. I should have been clearer, though, in mentioning what I was addressing. My bad.

[pErvinalia]

It's a bad thing for some Trump supporters.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Meh. Il Douche now says he didn't even know Bannon before he was hired onto the Trump campaign. He's either lying now, or he was lying before but of course we must always remember that it's "arguably true."

[L'Emmerdeur]

Full Interview: Julian Assange on Trump, DNC Emails, Russia, the CIA, Vault 7 & More

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/4/12/ ... e_on_trump

I'm going to avoid reading that - and I mirrored Wikileaks for 6 months when the US was trying to take it down. Assange used to add clarrity but now only adds confusion.

Not blaming you. I read it, and fair percentage of the content was Assange spewing in doubletalk (including referring to Democrats as "neo-McCarthyist," essentially parroting Trump) and thumping his chest.

[laklak]

That's a wonderful picture, I'm stealing it and posting on FB.

[JimC]

I have no objection to wiping out a cave full of jihadists...

You think a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius, causes shock waves enough to kill people at 1.7, and deafness up 2 miles and cause damage up to 5 only hit the bad guys?

If it is in an area with only the bad guys in a cave, then yeah...

Not something to use anywhere where there are civilians near by...

Fortunately no civilians live within the two kilometre radius of the bomb blast. We know that because Reuters reports that Afghan Ministry of Defence spokesman General Dawlat Waziri said no civilians were harmed.

Yes, OK, you're being sarcastic. However, it seems highly likely that a Taliban cave retreat would be in fairly wild country, not in the middle of a village...

[Hermit]

I have no objection to wiping out a cave full of jihadists...

You think a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius, causes shock waves enough to kill people at 1.7, and deafness up 2 miles and cause damage up to 5 only hit the bad guys?

If it is in an area with only the bad guys in a cave, then yeah...

Not something to use anywhere where there are civilians near by...

Fortunately no civilians live within the two kilometre radius of the bomb blast. We know that because Reuters reports that Afghan Ministry of Defence spokesman General Dawlat Waziri said no civilians were harmed.

Yes, OK, you're being sarcastic. However, it seems highly likely that a Taliban cave retreat would be in fairly wild country, not in the middle of a village...

It's either sarcasm or flying into a rage at the utter idiocy of what the yanks got up to. I chose the former. It saves on crockery and avoids startling the mutt.

So you have no objection to wiping out a cave full of jihadists. Maybe dropping a $US16 million bomb using a $US155 million aeroplane running at $US32,752 per hour in order to kill 36 terrorists and destroy their ammunition and other stores is cheap, all factors considered. Maybe the collateral damage can be justified somehow. What might the collateral damage be? We can't expect anybody to provide figures that have not been altered to suit one bias or another, so I'm speculating now: Of course we can totally ignore the 1500 mountain goats and 89,621 other vertebrates. It's a sparsely populated area. Shall we say two per km² people live there? That's non-terrorists 47 dead.

The cost in lives and material is actually irrelevant. I think the MOAB has created several hundred tribe and family members who have now become interested in joining ISIS or al Quaeda, or are at least a lot more supportive and sympathetic to the cause of Islamic terrorism. In light of what actually happened, and setting the immediate collateral damage aside, do you still have no objection to wiping out a cave full of jihadists?

[DRSB]

I am with Hermit here. The jihadists have already been replaced but the cave cannot be replaced, this is a huge destruction beyond justification.

[JimC]

The cost is a problem for the US, not me. And "1500 mountain goats"? Seriously...
You are only assuming "collateral damage". It has been a substantial issue with drones and other air strikes targeting "suspected terrorist hideouts" in villages, sure, and the real collateral damage done in those cases does generate anger, and support for ISIS etc., let alone any ethical issues. All I am saying is there was a very good chance that this is a case where only murderous jihadist arseholes were killed - the more the better...

[DRSB]

I hope the cave in question is artificial, some passages. Otherwise, caves are ecosystems of huge significance.