Posted on 03/04/2016 10:51:27 AM PST by GIdget2004
Leading GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump said Friday he wouldn't order the U.S. military to break international laws, addressing criticism from military and legal experts that his policies regarding torture and killing the family members of terrorists would violate the Geneva Convention.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Like the Magic Negro?
Is that what you mean?
Try again soon.
When you grow up and know the difference between Obamacare and single payer...
Or not.
So, what is your point?
I don’t support deliberately targeting non-combatants.
But collateral damage happens. Ever read about the fire-bombing of Dresden? Under the current rules of “engagement” we would all be speaking German or Japanese or in a NAZI death camp.
...ununiformed civilians, armed to the teeth, including heavy artillery, and wantonly killing everything in sight?
I'll let you confirm that.
I don't have time for that. I know very rich people are intellectual dunces, but I don't believe Trump is one of those.
Further, it's absurd to expect a candidate, before being chosen as THE candidate, to have already assembled a cabinet, as well as advisors and specialized experts to address every nuance of governing 320,000,000 people.
Some have no desire actually to learn and receive expert advice, since they already know everything... viz. the Clintons, the Magic negro...
Others, have an agenda, e.g. the fundamental transformation of a successful representative democracy, free-exchange private property successful nation. e.g. the Magic Negro.
I am convinced that Trump is none of those, or at the very least has not already demonstrated the tendency beyond dispute..
I am just as convinced that the duplicitous lying, elected criminals and their equally corrupt bureaucracy (confirmed by 25 years of recent experience,) is not suddenly about to stop their lust for power and wealth, and actually live the statement, "America First," rather than "party first."
You just lost the debate, senile moron!
Off with you and get your caretaker to give you your meds.
Sorry, but you don't seem to know much about modern targeting strategies, and you are projecting your ideas onto what Mr. Trump actually said. Our drone operators regularly target and kill people who aren't fighting anybody, they are walking into their houses in Pakistan, or riding in a car in Yemen. Their family members get killed along with them, and to suggest that by aiming and firing a Hellfire missile at a car or house somehow the family members aren't being targeted is nonsense, although of course a convenient legal fiction.
The people who approve the strike have made the decision that killing the family members along with the "target" is a reasonable trade-off, just like our military under President Bush decided to bomb a crowded restaurant in Iraq where intelligence reports suggested Saddam Hussein was dining. Saddam wasn't there, just a bunch of civilians. I guess you consider the Airmen who delivered the bombs and the commanders who approved the strike "ignoramuses and an immoral goons."
HOw do you know that??
This is simple common sense. Only the most ignorant, or the naïve (young children or the senile) can fail to see that.
Ununiformed no-State terrorists, and their families definitely know that their spouses are unrestrained killers, and targets of whatever victims they are slaughtering...
Terrorists' families can then choose where to live or hang out with the "children" to suit themselves.
Or not
We hope not. Because if we are right about Trump, the results will be disasterous
Since you know nothing about me that related to serving in the military, you are attacking facts not in evidence.
Suffice to say I am not in the same category as the First Rapist...
Of course, your knee jerk response tells me all I need to know.
Well, screw the "experts," whoever they may be, and you for inferring what it does not say.
My inference is clearly different than yours, and subject to honest difference in interpretation.
Collateral damage is NOT specifically targeting for the purpose of murder, etc...
That you choose a different inference is your problem, not the (admittedly ambiguous) text's, nor mine.
Unfortunately for you, context is everything and your definition of "apt" is too Clintonian to expand on.
So by all means, continue. The fool being created is clear as day.
Pssst.
It sure as hell isn't you, either!
I suppose that it hinges on the state of mind and biases of the listener, plus the context.
For me, the statement always referred to the collateral damage case, nor specifically targeting family.
Of course, I allow for the impossibility of perfection when having to speak tens of thousands of words, extemporaneously, daily, without the benefit of thinking through the perfect choice of words or phrases.
That gives ignorant opportunists running loose in FR free rein to infer statements in the worst possible way.
Makes them feel morally superior, doesn't it.
Asinine challenge.
Name one civilian, you included, that can claim perfection in that regard.
I am claiming the reality that, until a few months ago, Trump was, like us, just another non-professional-career-politician.
(I prefer to call them "elected and appointed criminals")
I got it now. But I've already addressed that straw man elsewhere in this thread.
Perfectly worded.
Wannabe moralists; perfection irrevocably in pursuit of destruction of the good...
Man are you dense!
Yes we do if we know the bloodthirsty terrorist is also inside.
The quickly disappearing (on this forum) reasonable man, notwithstanding. Adult family members know that their hero head of household is a celebrated random and barbaric killer. They celebrate his status.
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.