The Venezuela thread

[LSU-SIU]

Then you're not making the point you think you are.

I asked above for example quotes of the context that clearly proves the contradiction. The definition you just responded about seems to indicate that "war" entails sustain combat and/or significant military forces, neither of which classify Trump's engagements as war. So, you need to give us the clear context that shows Trump was promising isolationism as opposed to America-First, Monroe/Jeffersonian-ism.

If George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden or a theoretical Hillary Clinton was doing this - we would all be saying we're at war or same ole .

The Orange man is right on probably the "why" here, but the rest of it is what it is.

 

[Orange_Crush]

If George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden or a theoretical Hillary Clinton was doing this - we would all be saying we're at war or same ole .

The Orange man is right on probably the "why" here, but the rest of it is what it is.

I'm not sure who'd say what. Those guys entangled us in long term occupations. Trump bombed the **** out of Iran and kidnapped a drug kingpin who has US indictments.

But I'm trying to get lg to show us the context that so clearly proves that Trump was using a definition of war that isn't the definition of war. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Trump was promising to act for America's benefit on the global stage by not acting on the global stage. <shrug>

 

[LSU-SIU]

I'm not sure who'd say what. Those guys entangled us in long term occupations. Trump bombed the **** out of Iran and kidnapped a drug kingpin who has US indictments.

But I'm trying to get lg to show us the context that so clearly proves that Trump was using a definition of war that isn't the definition of war. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Trump was promising to act for America's benefit on the global stage by not acting on the global stage. <shrug>

Pretty much everyone.

But I'm trying to get lg to show us the context that so clearly proves that Trump was using a definition of war that isn't the definition of war.

What I would say what you are doing is playing semantics. Look, I'm not even condemning him or you at this point, that is whole other discussion. I don't think most sane people would be upset if the U.S. was attacked or immediate threat or something, but once you get to doing what he is doing... they are acts of war.

 

[Vol8188]

Wonder how much he'll take for himself?


But the DrUgS........

In your mind he’s taking a cut of the oil money and pocketing it? While simultaneously telling everyone how much oil he is importing?

Your theory is beyond wild.

 

[utvolpj]

We're not at war with any of those countries. We absolutely have had military action in them but not at war

Then we haven't been at war in 80yrs. Sound about right?

 

[n_huffhines]

If the oil was stolen from American companies why do they have to buy it back at market value?

 

[LSU-SIU]

If the oil was stolen from American companies why do they have to buy it back at market value?

If a government in the world seizes my money, the U.S. government isn't going to do collections for me. That just seems like a civil matter between parties, as a generalization.

 

[NashVol11]

Again, shocker

 

[Orange_Crush]

What I would say what you are doing is playing semantics. Look, I'm not even condemning him or you at this point, that is whole other discussion. I don't think most sane people would be upset if the U.S. was attacked or immediate threat or something, but once you get to doing what he is doing... they are acts of war.

You're welcome to your opinion, of course.

 

[RockyTop85]

Again, shocker

It’s not like Trump is keeping it! What do you think he’s going to do, spend it on something Congress didn’t authorize? Buy fuel for his Qatari jet?

 

[LSU-SIU]

You're welcome to your opinion, of course.

 

[Orange_Crush]

You're making my point about definitions being important, while simultaneously claiming that I'm playing semantics by referring to definitions. lol

Starting to see why I don't care about your opinion?

LG is trying to go back in time to enforce a definition of war that is not the definition of war in order to insult both Trump and the people who don't knee-jerk accuse Trump. When asked for proof that Trump was promising LG's non-definition, he seems to fade.

From what I can tell, the definition of "war" seems entail both/or prolonged combat and/or significant military forces. Neither of Trump's engagements meet that criteria. And that seems to be the definition Trump was using when he promised not to get us bogged down in occupations and nation-building.



So, again. It's a bit schizophrenic to accuse me of semantics because I'm demanding proper definitions, and then chastise me as if I don't care about definitions.

LG doesn't get to accuse via equivocation. Let's stay true to definitions. And if Trump was not promising that definition, then by all means show us with quotes.

 

[LSU-SIU]

You're making my point about definitions being important, while simultaneously claiming that I'm playing semantics by referring to definitions. lol

Starting to see why I don't care about your opinion?

LG is trying to go back in time to enforce a definition of war that is not the definition of war in order to insult both Trump and the people who don't knee-jerk accuse Trump. When asked for proof that Trump was promising LG's non-definition, he seems to fade.

From what I can tell, the definition of "war" seems entail both/or prolonged combat and/or significant military forces. Neither of Trump's engagements meet that criteria. And that seems to be the definition Trump was using when he promised not to get us bogged down in occupations and nation-building.

View attachment 804507

So, again. It's a bit schizophrenic to accuse me of semantics because I'm demanding proper definitions, and then chastise me as if I don't care about definitions.

LG doesn't get to accuse via equivocation. Let's stay true to definitions. And if Trump was not promising that definition, then by all means show us with quotes.

Under that definition, Donald Trump launches the U.S. nuclear arsenal on China, Russia and India and its just a brief military engagement.

You are playing semantics because most people have a clear understanding of what Trump and Vance have been talking about for years.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Under that definition, Donald Trump launches the U.S. nuclear arsenal on China, Russia and India and its just a brief military engagement.

You are playing semantics because most people have a clear understanding of what Trump and Vance have been talking about for years.

I've been asking for quotes. If you can show me where they promised no military engagements for America's benefit, I'll concede the point. It won't hurt my feelings a bit. I admit I didn't hang on their every word during the campaigns. I do remember phrases like "endless wars" and "nation-building". I didn't interpret that as the promises LG claims.

War | History, Causes, Types, Meaning, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

War, in the popular sense, a conflict between political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance with socially recognized forms.

www.britannica.com

war, in the popular sense, a conflict between political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude. In the usage of social science, certain qualifications are added. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance with socially recognized forms. They treat war as an institution recognized in custom or in law. Military writers usually confine the term to hostilities in which the contending groups are sufficiently equal in power to render the outcome uncertain for a time. Armed conflicts of powerful states with isolated and powerless peoples are usually called pacifications, military expeditions, or explorations; with small states, they are called interventions or reprisals; and with internal groups, rebellions or insurrections. Such incidents, if the resistance is sufficiently strong or protracted, may achieve a magnitude that entitles them to the name “war.”

It's not semantics. It's refusing to allow others to call a tail a leg without giving the context and proof that Trump was doing so during the campaigns. It's a refusal to allow victory laps via equivocation.

 

[jmacvols1]

np

 

[Orange_Crush]

and there it is

Put it in the ICE thread where they'll see it.

 

[jmacvols1]

Put it in the ICE thread where they'll see it.

oops

 

[LSU-SIU]

I've been asking for quotes. If you can show me where they promised no military engagements for America's benefit, I'll concede the point. It won't hurt my feelings a bit. I admit I didn't hang on their every word during the campaigns. I do remember phrases like "endless wars" and "nation-building". I didn't interpret that as the promises LG claims.

War | History, Causes, Types, Meaning, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

War, in the popular sense, a conflict between political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance with socially recognized forms.

www.britannica.com

It's not semantics. It's refusing to allow others to call a tail a leg without giving the context and proof that Trump was doing so during the campaigns. It's a refusal to allow victory laps via equivocation.

You are dealing in semantics because everyone knows what they meant.

On the surface these appear to be same horse **** that has been going for 50-60 years. I can maybe agree on most of the "why" but no if any the previous Presidents did this... we would all be shaking our heads.

 

[Orange_Crush]

You are dealing in semantics because everyone knows what they meant.

On the surface these appear to be same horse **** that has been going for 50-60 years. I can maybe agree on most of the "why" but no if any the previous Presidents did this... we would all be shaking our heads.

So more vague claims and no proof. Like I said, you are welcome to your opinion.

Just remember: Calling a tail a leg will not convince sane people that the dog has five legs.

 

[LSU-SIU]

So more vague claims and no proof. Like I said, you are welcome to your opinion.

Just remember: Calling a tail a leg will not convince sane people that the dog has five legs.

Hey guys, we sent assassination teams to 100 different countries to take out all their leadership, its just a misunderstanding. Hey guys, we invaded a country but we were only in there for week, it was a vacation.

Hey guys, we dropped 100 nukes on your country, its just bad placement.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Hey guys, we sent assassination teams to 100 different countries to take out all their leadership, its just a misunderstanding. Hey guys, we invaded a country but we were only in there for week, it was a vacation.

Go up a few posts and read the quote from Britannica. It may help. It also may not, but it should. They have words for those things. I even underlined those parts for your convenience.

You're calling a bunch of "tails" "legs", my friend.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Go up a few posts and read the quote from Britannica. It may help. It also may not, but it should. They have words for those things. I even underlined those parts for your convenience.

You're calling a bunch of "tails" "legs", my friend.

You're insane. You are saying the U.S. does whatever it wants as long its temporary and its not a war, its an act of war. This could lead to a full scale war. Its not complex.

You're insane if you believe dropping nukes on people isn't war, which is what you are basically saying.

 

[Orange_Crush]

You're insane. You are saying the U.S. does whatever it wants as long its temporary and its not a war, its an act of war. This could lead to a full scale war. Its not complex.

You're insane if you believe dropping nukes on people isn't war, which is what you are basically saying.

I'm not saying that at all. I'm questioning LG's accusation that Trump promised on the campaign trail not to engage in ANY foreign military engagements. He's having trouble proving it.

You're trying to convince me that the dog has 9 legs, and having trouble proving it, so you call me insane by attributing an argument that I'm not making. I'm not defending or condemning the engagements in Venezuela or Iran. I'm defining them in comparison to Trump's campaign promises, as I understood them.

So, by saying that it could lead to war, you're admitting that it is not war? Or are you just wanting to keep talking in circles?

 

[Orange_Crush]

 

[Orange_Crush]