guess that's what you have to resort to when you can't refute my point that hillary would not have just canceled the deal and cornered iran for the sake of escalation. it's funny how you never actually address the argument, always resort to some idiotic strawman... cultists gonna cult i guess...

careful my friend - you may overexcite a certain user here: https://forums.d2jsp.org/user.php?i=138769

I'm not disagreeing with any of that but it also has nothing to do with military intelligence.



How can someone prove a hypothetical situation to be false?



This post was edited by fuzzy159 on Jan 5 2020 08:51am

it's called common sense, political record, policy stances, and public statements. they lead to educated opinions regarding such szenarios, which clearly suggest his hypothetical was significantly flawed. you're welcome.

So you are still just making an education guess.

Arguing hypotheticals is even more ridiculous than arguing politics....and yet people feel the need to combine the two

Oh shit...

This sort of stuff is the EXACT opposite of what tRump campaigned on. But his followers don't care they just like to bow and worship.
which is how he likes it. I don't really oppose the move so much as cant stand the almost masturbation status of the reaction.. And from what tRump used to say.
IE tweets etc. ===Cult

there is a huge difference between wild speculation about a topic that we have no information about, and the policy stances and records of certain politicians. trying to make it sound like a completely random guess is rather disingenuous.

i can say with confidence that clinton would not have withdrawn from the paris accord or the iran deal, based on her record and comments regarding the issues of iran and climate change for example. i could not make a similarly confident 'guess' about what you would do if you were drafted into the military to become cannon fodder in the middle east, simply because i have never seen you make a statement about it, and i don't know anything about you. is that really so hard to understand, or are you just pretending it is, in order to make a completely reasonable assumption sound like a wild guess?

Was to be expected tbh. Iraq has to save face vs Iran too. I mean, Pakistan huffed and puffed when the OBL raid happened, and OBL isn't an official state actor.

So... Trump killed one of Iran's top generals, dealing a big blow to their overseas operations and terrorism infrastructure while also embarrassing them on the world stage and stressing the point that America is not to be fucked with - and now he gets a golden ticket to bring back the troops from Iraq, something he had wanted to do for a long time, all while both him and his country can save face?

5d chess confirmed? I think so!!!


and just so fender doesnt get triggered into writing a 10 chapter rage essay: /s

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jan 5 2020 09:31am