Posted on 02/27/2016 9:37:11 PM PST by ConservativeTeen
In Thursday night’s debate, Donald Trump put in a word for Saddam Hussein and Moammar Qaddafi, in a way. He said that, if those two were still in power, “instead of having terrorism all over the place, we’d be — at least they killed terrorists, all right?”
The fact is, they were terrorists. And funders and shelterers of other terrorists. (Abu Nidal, for one, in Saddam Hussein’s case.)
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Trumps words:
Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of the world –”
I asked other Trump haters but so far no takers. Care to try?
Specifically what words in his statement do YOU NOT CONSIDER AS FACTS?
“...and the restoration of workers’ control over industry.”
Quote saves the best for last.
All true. Thank God those commies stomped out that rebellion for liberty!
Better to have government control over industry? LOL
Germany would have developed the A bomb, the first intercontinental missiles and long range bombers. They probably would have failed at invasion but the third Reich and it's world influence would have left us as a primarily agrarian nation.
It is irrational, semi-literate incoherent rambling without any facts.
Nothing stated in that passage is factual.
What does “the power of strength” even mean?
Perhaps you can explain the point he was trying to make.
Great post.
But it’s not short memory, it’s that they never knew anything in the first place.
Blind leading the blind.
Beware the strongman. We don’t need a Mussolini but trump is starting to become Il Duce American
“Trump answered, “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of the world –”
Crushing protesters with tanks isn’t “strength,” Trump. That’s called “mass murder.”
So, the mullahs’ unleashing of the basiji militias to slaughter Green Movement Iranian protesters in the streets of Tehran in 2009 was - in Trump’s thinking - an act of “strength” as well?
“Do I agree with the government in Tiananmen Square? Of course not. It is none the less a real marker in government hard line resolve.”
Is that the kind of dictatorial “resolve” you would like a Trump government to exercise over the people of this country?
Where does it go from “strength” to “oppression” for Trump? How would he rate the “resolve” of the Khmer Rouge in ITS reign of terror vs the people of Cambodia?
Even the slightest hint of admiration for dictatorial power makes this guy dangerous.
“Actually Trump is correct. These regimes didn’t put up with terrorists.”
Would you consider the protesters who were mowed down in Beijing in 1989 to be “terrorists?”
Thanks for posting this. This helps to show just how far out that Trump is. No decent American admires the Chinese Communist for their slaughter of Chinese students. Trump defenders will say he was taken out of context. He wasn’t. His context is always that might makes right.
That Genghis Khan could teach us a few lessons about “resolve,” too. I suppose there are lots of great examples out there for those who admire the state so much that they don’t believe in human liberty or individual rights.
Yep. Trump’s statements ARE the context. What I find interesting is how those here in FR came find themselves admiring that kind of tyrannical “strength,” especially after 7.5 years of statist rule by the Obama regime.
On another computer I recently recorded the statements of several FReepers who over the past months have openly stated they’re OK with extra-constitutionally outsized power in executive hands, so long as those hands belong to Donald Trump. It’s some pretty amazing stuff.
Cute photo.
Still waiting for an actual response.
The regimes were the terrorists. I’m against all terrorism, not just free lance and self-starters. State-sponsored terrorism is no less terrorism.
“If you examine his words carefully (including after the word ‘but’), you will see they are simply facts.”
Same old tired “what he really meant was..” line. How is it somehow true that running tanks over peaceful demonstrators is a sign of “strength.” Would love to hear your explanation.
Hey, Trump’s had a tough life. Growing up super rich has its disadvantageous. How of those life experiences, he’s learned to look down on the peasants who want to have human liberty in places like Communist China. He knows that America needs a strongman like him.
That was my intent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.