If the US had used directed weather as a weapon in Iraq, or breached levies to flood cities it would have been proper to laugh at the ironic disaster in New Orleans. Remember, the support for attacking the wrong country to retaliate for 9/11 was incredibly high (yes, thinly predicated on what are now known to be blatant lies…we didn’t care), we were not a nation of innocents…(I personally supported attacking Saidi Arabia and doing limited but overwhelming “police actions” in Afghanistan to completely destroy the actual perpetrators, then rebuild any collateral damage better and make friends, and never bought the rationale for invading Iraq beyond “they tried to kill my daddy”- GB…but who listens to me?)

I felt it was karma specifically balancing the universe for the Ukrainian dam they blew up in a terrorist action just over 2 months ago, not the continuing invasion of Ukraine that’s been ongoing and expanding continuously since 2014 when Ukrainian Crimea was invaded and “annexed” by Russia, a move seemingly universally applauded in Russia.

I think there’s delicious schadenfreude in the very religious country that continues to support repeated violent genocidal expansionism against peaceful neighbors thinly predicated on blatant lies (but that support is waning slightly as the war and truth comes home), the aggressor nation that among numerous war crimes intentionally destroyed a major dam to sew chaos destruction and death as they retreated from portions of Ukraine and set forest fires for the same reason having to deal with forest fires and dam failures as “acts of god”, not even from military retaliation.

I do feel a bit bad for the individuals and families if reports of 12 dead are true (it’s Russian news, so likely untrue), but that number is dwarfed by those intentionally killed in their names by the dam destruction in Ukraine.

Agreed on the narration…it was the only coverage I found at the time….well, there was this but even I found it in bad taste…

First, nice paraphrasing what you say are gods perfect words. He would be pissed at you fudging them to protect Donny…if he existed. You fucked up big time. These are the commandments dummy….

#1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

#2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

#3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

#4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (That day was Saturday.)

#5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

#6. Thou shalt not kill.

#7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

#8. Thou shalt not steal.

#9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

#10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Now that he’s president and has murdered thousands, which of these has Trump not broken repeatedly?

1. He has always put himself before any god.
2. He made a gold idol of himself and displayed it for you to worship.
3. He has only ever misused the name of god. He wouldn’t know how to use it in any way besides as a sword or shield.
4. He fucks porn stars on the sabbath, and cheats at golf, and business…he’s never kept anything holy in his life, especially the sabbath.
5. He’s said some terrible things about his immigrant parents and by not fighting the charges but paying millions in fines has admitted they were racist bastards.
6. He killed hundreds as collateral damage from his intended targets for murder.
7. Adultery….he’s never been with any woman he didn’t cheat on, especially all those immigrants he married.
8. Theft…Convicted repeatedly of theft by fraud to the tune of hundreds of millions.
9. Has never given honest testimony or statements in his life, he’s incapable of honesty.
10. He covets everything he sees, especially his friend’s wives that he brags about trying to sleep with and their land he tries to steal.

What was your point? That rapist DJT is really the anti-Christ? 😂

Side note, his home in Florida is seeing a number of biblical plagues…disease like malaria and leprocy are becoming rampant (thanks to anti science health policies), the seas are boiling (over 101 degrees), and a plague of semi-aquatic reptiles are decimating wildlife (pythons), rivers are turning red (https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/florida-creek-red-blood), livestock pestilence (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7140416/mad-cow-disease-florida-us-outbreak-usda/)…just need darkness (wait for the next hurricane). Sounds like any first born children should probably leave the state immediately! 😂

Agreed, that’s why I said “if you intentionally murdered…”.

I would even go farther and say IMO the near the same applies if you knowingly kill non-combatant women and children even if it’s while defending yourself and they aren’t your intended target… you should still feel bad about it and feel obligated to make it your lifetime mission to ensure their sacrifice benefits their families/village/country not just you.

Collateral damage is a fact of war, but IMO intentional collateral damage is a war crime. That would include intentional gross negligence, not making any effort to avoid it, randomly firing at civilians, indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas, etc. even if they’re being used as human shields.

Not saying that’s the case here, but it often is.

When you cancel a project, you don’t lose the money, you just don’t spend it. Really?!

I’m guessing you think I’m “urban” (racist code in the US btw, might wanna go with “city folk”). You would have guessed wrong. The nearest town to me is Eureka, 25k people 25 miles away.

You just don’t understand money if you insist canceling a billion dollar project is the same as losing the same amount of money. Edit: that’s only true if it’s canceled after it’s completed.
I’m using the figures Auto manufacturers gave as their lost production value, not including the collateral damage temporarily closing those plants cost the communities and both up and down supply chains.

Funny, you don’t include hospitals, which the truckers also reportedly blocked.

Protests can be permitted. If you’re disrupting someone else’s or public property without a permit, expect arrest for trespassing/breaching the peace at least.

Odd, if that’s really your position, why would you defend the truckers rights to blockade a city of worksites, job sites, and trade routes…reasons be damned?!?

I’m of the opinion that protests designed to disrupt the lives of people completely uninvolved in your cause always hurt your cause and make you look selfish. I tend to not defend self centered tantrums. I do not put pipeline protests in that category, permanent contamination of watersheds effects everyone, and almost everyone buys oil.

The protests you mentioned didn’t halt commerce for huge swaths of your, and our country, did they? Severity and ubiquity of impacts matter.

Lemme ask you, did this protest ask for dialog, or outright refuse it?

None of the other protests intentionally caused as much collateral damage as possible. It’s not their cause, it’s their methodology and severity of the results.

It’s not about their cause du jure, it’s about their methods, causing economic damage as deep and widespread as possible. I’ll ask, did the other protests you mentioned try to shut the country down for their cause, or were they targeted against the industries/entities they were protesting?

I’m pretty certain that, had they not blocked freeways, border crossings, cities, and industries their protests wouldn’t be being broken up and protesters wouldn’t be arrested. Again, it’s not the why, it’s the how that’s an issue. Their methods aren’t the same as other tolerated protests in severity nor focus.

BUT…there is a significant difference, morally, ethically, and logically between protesting being murdered by police or protesting your last tiny bit of sovereign land or water sources being taken and permanently destroyed by oil companies, and protesting not getting a shot to have the privilege of traveling to another country. I’m far more prepared to be patient for life and death causes than ignorant inconvenience causes.

Edit: P.S. also, “fuck your feelings” goes both ways. These are the same people that took that stance for 4 years here (some still do). When you tell people “fuck your feelings” in response to any subject, any complaints, it’s pretty ridiculous to expect those same people to respect your feelings, especially while you honk a truck horn in their back yard all night for weeks. In my neighborhood, there would have been burning trucks night one, and peace night 2….but I’m a native Texan, kind of the opposite of a Canadian.

LMFAHS.
Yeah, you don’t sound triggered at all. Not one bit.

Way to intelligently answer the question.

*snicker*

Biden is moving towards putting American troops in Eastern Europe to stop Putin’s expansion plans….Trump illegally and secretly withheld congressionally approved arms and funding from the Ukraine that they desperately needed to fight Putin’s active invasion in a blackmail scheme, and recognized his annexation of Crimea without a whimper, and ignored multiple assassinations on foreign soil with collateral damages.
Biden helped draft crippling sanctions against Russia in 2016, Trump illegally negotiated those sanctions away for nothing in return before being sworn in, as a favor to his friend Vladimir….it’s what Flynn pleaded guilty to (after he learned he was on tape doing it).
So ignorant and deluded, bob. I guess that’s why you consistently fail to include any facts in your posts, it’s hard to fact check whining and sniveling.

Our health care system was stretched beyond it's limits with under 2% of Americans infected over a 9 month period, and even so 200000 died (likely more), some from lack of access to hospitals because they had zero beds available in entire states.
His plan is now to allow 35-40 times that many people to get infected in the next few years, which would lead to 7.3 million dead if we could give them the same treatment and mortality rate, but we simply cannot. 15-20% need ICU beds and equipment, in Trump's plan 9/10 won't get it at best, all those people will die, bringing the mortality rate up to as high as 20% +-.

.70 (expected minimum effective infection rate) x 350000000(population) x .20 (probable mortality rate without ICU care) = likely 49 MILLION +- expected dead if all goes to plan under Trump's herd mentality plan....an apt name since he's lining up Americans and sending us to the killing floors.

So somewhere between an optimistic 7.3 million and a pessimistic 49 million dead sacrificed Americans is his best idea (he knows tested widespread vaccines are years off and only good until the virus mutates, which it has already), plus any collateral damage from no functional health care and other factors. I can't fathom where this 3 million number that's being tossed around comes from, it seems insanely optimistic and not based in reality.

In California, PIT maneuver isn't attempted above around 35mph because of exactly this scenario. Not just the health of the drivers, but the collateral damage can be astronomical.

Death toll forecast:

Stewpid people - 97%
Collateral damage - 3%

This is how we fulfill our responsibility to nature.
Humans deserve eradication as quickly and with as little collateral damage as possible.
Wanna fund my avian measles project? Ebolaids was a bust.

When asked about the innocent 8 year old girl shot through the neck, you replied 'they advocate killing children, killing them (and their children) lowers the overall body count' but really it increases it, because every child that's collateral damage creates 100+ more violent enemies bent on revenge.

Again, context, bombing a nation we are at war with is 100% a different thing from targeted assassination by multiple drone strike or assassination squad on a group. I see that's how you insist on seeing things, but it's not reality. You can't declare war on a group, it's a total intentional misapplication of the term.

If we only targeted known (not suspected) fighters and killers and didn't bomb weddings to get one guy, ok, but we attack large groups and then attack the first responders coming to their aid, then claim they are all terrorists because one of them might be one....creating more terrorists by murdering innocents and then washing our hands smugly. Can you admit that?


By your standard for designating proper targets, we should have bombed the royal family in Saudi Arabia long long ago, but that's not on the table because.....oil and cash.

You used the accusation that they advocate killing children to excuse us killing their children during our assassinations by drone.
EDIT: You strongly implied it's OK and smart to kill children as collateral damage because it "lowers the overall body count" and because we don't target the children specifically, but they do (but we don't not target them).
You don't have to say the exact words you put in quotes to mean it. I did not quote you saying those specific words, did I?

We aren't at war, war is between nations. This is an international police action at best.
And again, you aren't being honest to play a semantics game and conflate active attacks on a battlefield with supportive speeches. We aren't at war, and there's no American citizen filled battle group, and never has been one fighting Americans. (not since the civil war, that is)
EDIT: To be labeled and killed as an "enemy combatant", we should have to be able to prove they are actually engaged in combat, IMO.

You are being deliberately obtuse. It's NOT war, war as a legal concept only occurs between nations, not groups of individuals. That is not opinion, it's international law. It is war like, but that's a completely different legal situation, one that until recently would not allow us to kill Americans.

So you are appalled at what ISIS are doing, but you still see the US army as the worst people in the world? This is why I'm agreeing with that quotation.

As much as US collateral damage could be lessened, they are hardly the worst people in the world. Especially as individuals - when a soldier goes home at the end of their tour, they're just regular a regular person. You cannot say the same thing for a member of a terrorist organisation where the practices listed above are considered not only normal, but law.

There is a really big difference between accidental, or even negligently causing civilian deaths vs. a doctrine to kill civilians (especially when they are your own civilians) - that's another thing entirely no?

Like I said in my previous comment, the bombing is not even anywhere near as indiscriminate as the left media would make it seem.

I agree with Oliver here, but I think he sorta missed an opportunity to talk about confirming exactly who our US Constitutional protections should apply to.

It has been all-to-common in the past decade-plus for people / bodies in our government to "justify" questionable actions by saying that they were performed on people who aren't US citizens. Detain and torture suspected (or *known*) terrorists indefinitely without trial? That's fine, they aren't citizens. Send drone strikes against people outside of US borders that we suspect may be aiding terrorists, even though collateral damage is likely? Meh, they aren't Americans. Spy on people, record and intercept their communications to the greatest extent possible without a warrant or probable cause? Never mind -- we're not doing it to our own citizens (even though we now know that even that justification is an outright lie).

It would be nice for the government to take a stand and state that ALL of the protections that are granted by our constitution and have made our country what it is should actually be considered universal and binding in terms of how our government interacts with ALL people, not just US citizens.

Freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, fair trial, no unreasonable searches and seizures, etc. etc. Consistently and universally applied whenever the government has any interaction with any human being on the planet -- inside or outside of US soil, and whether that person is a US Citizen or not.

I suppose it would take a constitutional amendment to codify that. That would require 2/3 support in congress -- so I won't hold my breath. But here is where a president with true leadership could step up and say that whether there is an official amendment codifying that or not, every government office under his (or her) command should behave as though that was law. All the 3-letter agencies, the military, etc. I think that would get the ball rolling and make an amendment possible on down the line.

Our constitutional protections are arguably what made our country great. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by proving that to the rest of the world by actually standing by the courage of our own convictions.

There aren't even words.

Saddam was a bad guy is absolutely the most ignorant remark you can make. Were Stalin, Hitler and Mao simply 'bad' guys? Saddam committed multiple genocides against his own people. Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians killed not as collateral damage, but systematically. The remaining widows were systematically raped to impregnate the Kurdish women with half-Arab children and breed the Kurds out of existence. If that's not enough, Saddam invaded and seized Kuwait and declared a part of Iraq. In the Iran-Iraq war, he made extensive use of banned chemical and biological weapons against Iranian forces, before turning them on Kurdish Iraqi's as well. Anybody content to just call that 'bad' behaviour is morally bankrupt.

Oh, but along the way Saddam brutally murdered anybody that spoke out against him, or had their daughters raped or their families otherwise held hostage or also killed. More over, because Saddam classed these people as 'terrorists', clearly we should take him at his word. In that one sense, yes, Saddam was effective at killing and pacifying the people he counted as 'terrorists'. That of course is missing the fact that Saddam was the singularly most terrifying monster in the entire Middle East at the time.