Yea for too many years the “destabilize “ BS has been allowed to even be listened to..

ok he was 'only' vice president speaking declaratively about the policies for the Obama/Biden administration. Grandstanding certitude on troop withdrawal regardless of conditions... and it turned out to be a big lie.
But its ok he was only VP. We should trust him now.

Biden is losing his faculties and says (or attempts to say) whatever he is told to say with little capability of independent thought or will for diversion.
He is the current figurehead of an establishment evil you have been supporting.


Yes I wish Trump did more to end the wars and interventions abroad. Thats absolutely a negative of his presidency.

In case you didn't notice he wasn't exactly in charge of much either. Much of the federal government was actively subversive.
Indications of withdrawing from Syria were met with incredible hostility, allegations of loyalty to Russia, and practically mutiny.
His national security advisor who favored less intervention was immediately set up and arrested by the deep state in record time.
He could barely choose an intern or eat a snack without a fake scandal erupting.

This isn't about deflecting to Trump. Its about biden. 'But trump did something' doesn't absolve Biden or erase your support for establishment warmongers while labeling their critics evil or braindead for doing so.


Again, this is about Biden and you, not fake claims of me loving Trump. The war in Yemen is an abomination that I have spoken about and shared videos about numerous times.
Retreating to this old cliché about me that I have refuted 100x instead of honestly addressing the issues is pathetic.


petty and irrelevant.

You've been a consistent neocon and now you're deviating from that because unlike Cam or I, your political beliefs aren't based on principles. Like it didn't matter if it was Syria, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Lybia people like Cam and I didn't really waver. You could look through the years we've been posting on here and find our anti-intervention position has been clear and consistent.

For the most part, you've been consistently a neocon, now all of the sudden because Biden is for pulling the troops you all of the sudden are unclear or are doing a 180 in a phone booth. Okay.

Also, troops in Afghanistan are very expensive. The latest figure I've seen is 44 billion dollars in 2018 for about 15k troops. In 2020-21 now that we have like 1/3 of those troops i'd bet that number is still into the double digits of billions of dollars.

Let's say that number now is 15 billion because troop levels are 1/3 of what they were in 2018. That means every soldier there costs about 3 million dollars. That's an exorbitant amount of money and a colossal waste for the US taxpayer.

It's simply a fact that he was VP and he was supporting his boss's professed position on the issue. Sure, criticism is warranted because he was wrong, but to bring it up when your cult leader failed to leave Afghanistan and Biden has announced we will be seems odd.



Biden's mental faculties managed to defeat Trump in every debate, as well as deliver a coherent speech in front of Congress. Maybe you should deal with what he does, not fantasies about his non-existent dementia.

So you admit Trump failed on wars and intervention, and then like the boot licker you are, place blame on everybody else in Washington. If your position is that Trump was too stupid and cowardly to take on the Washington establishment, I think we're in agreement. But my guess is Rand Paul, and many others, could've managed it.



You yammer on in every reply to me about my viewpoints and motivations. You gave Trump a free pass for his failure as a president who would bring troops home, and then proceed to criticize Biden for not bringing them home quick enough. The reality is that Biden in just a few months has delivered more for non-interventionists than Trump ever did, but you're stuck in "defend the cult leader and attack his opponents" mode.

I just find it strange you don't quote me when you are obviously responding to what I've said, even calling me out by name. It's bad form.



Your conception of neocon is anyone that doesn't want to hand the world over to Russia and China. I support America's traditional foreign policy of supporting our allies and countering our enemies overseas. I've never supported misguided ventures like the Iraq war. I hold a pragmatic viewpoint about America's role overseas, and take new conflicts on a case by case basis, whereas you hold an ideological viewpoint against any overseas presence or intervention.

A small amount of money and almost no lives lost to maintain our presence in a strategic area in the Middle East, and to withhold Islamist extremists from taking over this area, is not expensive. From a cold strategic perspective, leaving seems like a bad option. But I'm unsure because we've been there for 20 years, and we're never going to make Afghanistan a sane country.

Ok I was right. Great. Biden shouldn't be blindly trusted for saying he is going to do something.



low IQ binary thinking and deflection.


delusional on multiple levels.
biden repeated garbage left talking points and a barrage of lies. "antifa is an idea". yeah great debate wins.

You should accept that fact that Biden is mentally slipping. There is no shame in that. Its beyond obvious at this point.

I do deal with what he actually does instead of just what he says. Thats what I was getting at, not just praising him for words and promises that he breaks.
His track record is as comprehensively bad as it gets. Directly involved in, supported and led most of the worst government abuses and evils of the past several decades. Personally culpable for the deaths of millions and domestic mass incarceration.



You are the actual bootlicker here.
Criticizing the government and explaining an extent of the problem is not bootlicking.
You pretend I never criticize trump and when I explicitly recognize a bad thing about his presidency you still accuse me of bootlicking instead of honestly addressing the points. Pathetic.

Its a statement of obvious fact that Trump was pretty uniquely at odds with much of the federal government. Do you contest this?



Retreading the same lies I just explicitly refuted. Boring.

Multiple things can be true at the same time.
>I wish Trump did more and succeeded more at reducing interventionism/war. Its bad that he didn't.
>Some of the major factors that led to him being less successful in that area were other people that were against it.
> Biden and his deep state faction are long time warmongers and perpetrators that deserve criticism and condemnation

Yes its fair to criticize Biden even if you want to whine about Trump and pretend I should be praising Biden.


strawman boomer idiocy.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on May 1 2021 02:34pm

Uh... obviously? Lol. But his position of withdrawing this year is a very serious indicator that we should expect it. Otherwise, it's harmful politically.



Sure, presenting context about Trump's failure to withdrawal from Afghanistan makes no sense.



A politician repeating talking points is kind of standard, no? The reality is that Biden has lost a step the last number of years, but he was clearly competent enough to defeat Trump in all the debates, so obsessing over his supposed dementia just looks ridiculous, unless you concede Trump is also a dementia patient.

Biden has supported some bad things in the past, for sure. Anyone who has been around in Washington this long would have those scars. I don't see that as a reason to oppose him now, when clearly he's changed his views on many issues. And if we're talking about the positions of politicians in the past, Trump held tough-on-crime and hawkish positions.



You've been bootlicking Trump and his cronies for 5 years. Opposing an interventionist foreign policy doesn't absolve you of other sins. Trump was at odds with some in the government because he was insanely corrupt. Those instances of corruption were when he ran into trouble the most. The FBI didn't investigate him because he wanted a better relationship with Russia... they did so because he employed a bunch of 3rd stringers who had suspicious ties to Russia. He got impeached the first time because he was acting as a mobster leveraging the power of the US government to force an investigation of his likely opponent(who is now the President of the United States). You characterize all of this as "the deep state trying to take down Trump" because it's more aligned with your worldview to think of these actors as evil than the President you supported as corrupt.



When is it not true that the major factors of presidents ending conflict are other people who are against it? That's simply the nature of the situation. It's like saying "Bob wanted to exercise but his mental faculties were against it". It's not like this is unique to Trump... there are those in Washington against ending conflicts.

Yeah, I'm not a cult member for Biden, so I'm willing to admit he's done bad things in the past. That doesn't offend me. But what he's doing now is mostly agreeable to non-interventionists, so my assumption would be for you to like that.



Nobody who calls me a neocon could articulate what the term even means.

Pretty low iq mischaracterization. What does the war in Afghanistan have to do with Russia or China? What does my position of being against our actions in Lybia have to do with Russia? I've almost always argued that these wars a colossal waste of our resources. Afghanistan alone was 1 trillion. If you take all of these wars combined it's 10 trillion dollars.

There's nothing strategic about holding down mountains in Afghanistan. There are no natural resources there, there are no trade routes we need protecting, it's a waste of time. What is the strategic advantage of being there? Like lol, how clueless are you?



Not true. That's actually very easy.

Always supporting wars and interventions, regardless of merits.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on May 1 2021 03:45pm

You are dishonest throughout. Stop lying. Its convincing no one.
Its a poor deflection from criticism of Biden and the establishment. You are exposed and there is no hiding anymore.

Bold is dishonesty and false claims

This post was edited by cambovenzi on May 1 2021 03:45pm

What does pulling troops out of Germany have to do with Afghanistan? You were the one who brought up my opposition to pulling troops out of Germany. Are you trying to argue that you aren't in favor of withdrawing US troops from around the world? If so, that's news to me. I seem to recall arguing in favor of US presence around the world(Germany, Japan , South Korea) against your opposition.



That's not what neocon means. In regards to foreign policy in the 2000's it means an interventionist foreign policy with the goal of promoting democracy abroad. I've never supported that, and I've also never supported every war or intervention. I have never in my years here supported the Iraq war. Not once. You simply characterize anyone who supports a traditional, strong American foreign policy as a neocon. Lazy thinking. We can have a strong presence abroad supporting American interests and our allies without engaging in harmful interventions like Iraq.



It's honestly hilarious to me that you just bold the points of mine you disagree with and consider that a legitimate response on a political forum. I'm so glad I unblocked you... it's endless entertainment.

Trying to laugh off your dishonesty and anti-intellectual cowardice is not an unexpected response.