You should read what Trump supporting veterans say about him: Belligerent and entitled; a shame to military servicemen. No joke, in the fucking comments of the USAT article.

Some people even had the gall to say this veteran's shameful actions will harm Chili's business and that he shouldn't have fought over the meal. He should have been the bigger man and left without a free dinner, because military people don't sweat the small stuff -- you know, the small stuff, like human rights violations.

See what I'm doing? I'm breaking the influence of your echo chamber so you can hear the reasonable arguments from the Trump supporters you've been ignoring while you remain clueless talking with all your liberal friends about propaganda.

Come on, the reasonable qualities of racism are important issues largely being ignored by the left. At least listen. lolllllllllllll

So let's be real about what happened here. Some racist Trump supporter saw a black guy getting a free meal and didn't like it so he complained to the manager.

Kudos to the veteran for not putting up with that bullshit.

Your video, Chili’s manager takes away free meal from veteran, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Followup:

1. Chili's apologized in bland corp-speak: http://brinker.mediaroom.com/newsreleases?item=135354

2. The manager was placed on leave: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/11/15/chilis-manager-who-took-vets-meal-veterans-day-placed-leave/93876364/

Uppity veteran.

@newtboy

you said:
Call it what you will. To me, massive illegal immigration with the goal of territorial control is invasion...no matter why they invaded. Invaders always have a reason.
Hence my making the distinction between Arab and Jewish controlled Palestine. Officially the British were still ruling over Palestine, but in most practical ways, Palestine was already divided before the mass immigration started. There was essentially Jewish Palestine and Arab Palestine, and the normal conflicts between close neighbours with different religion were already significant before the illegal immigration. Of all the places for Jewish Europeans to flee to, the land already in the possession and control of welcoming Jewish Palestinians hardly stinks of invasion to me.

Sorry, I know I tried to refocus on what they should have done and immediately leapt off the rails myself.

You said:
should have fought the Nazis, not the mostly blameless (for the atrocities) Palestinians
A majority of them that made it into Britain and America did just that. In fact, so many fought against the Nazis that when the civil war in Palestine came to a head and WW2 veteran Jewish soldiers started showing up it's counted part of the Arab narrative as 'western' support and part of the unfair military advantage that made Israel the mighty power and the Arab league army the underdogs.

You said:
The U.S. was open...if they could get here.
No, nothing was open. As pictures of the camps spread, doors started opening but that was very much after the fact. Leading up to and during WW2 immigration numbers were very restricted to jewish people. There simply was absolutely no legal immigration option for thousands and thousands of Jewish Europeans.

You said:
neighbors and allies try to secure their borders that are being crossed by invaders
You misunderstand my statement on the Arab League member's intentions. They had NO intention of defending their neighbouring Arab Palestinian's land. Sure, publicly they declared a joint effort to liberate Palestine. Each member nation though was stating that as code for liberate a portion of Palestine by making it a part of themselves. Israel was able to take the best equipped and trained Jordanian army out of the battle without a single shot fired by agreeing with them to simply abandon the portion of Palestine that Jordan proceeded to make a part of itself. The other Arab states made similar bids militarily, refusing to co-ordinate their assaults because each wanted to declare the ground gained their own. As they each rushed their offensives and attacked individually Israel had the time to plant 100% of their forces in the path of each of them.

You asked:
Should I think you call Turkey an invader of Daesh, and you a supporter of Daesh?
In the sense that you are asking, it's a near yes. The original Syrian resistance is a group I really do support, and the Kurdish fighters have largely been on their same side and I support their efforts there as well. Daesh was much more interested in killing the 'legitimate' resistance than Assad and Putin's forces. Similarly, the Russians have made it a firm practice to exclusively attack the 'legitimate' resistance and doing their best to largely not bother attacking Daesh unless forced to. The main reason being that once Daesh is all that's left, the scorched earth fix becomes all the more easily justified, and the actual rebels pose a much more real and legitimate alternative to Assad's government than Daesh.

Cain't go wrong with this dude.

*promote

Support our Veterans - 22 Pushups a Day for 22 Days

Why? I kinda like that he called out Trump on having no interest in Veteran's welfare until he needed to buy their vote.

Congratulations! Your comment on Two Veterans Debate Trump and his beliefs. Wowser. has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Two Veterans Debate Trump and his beliefs. Wowser. has been added as a related post - related requested by bareboards2 on that post.

This Veteran Has Had Enough of Trump's Selfishness has been added as a related post - related requested by bareboards2.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/This-Veteran-Has-Had-Enough-of-Trumps-Selfishness

I think you will find that most veterans, and currently serving men and women, simply want a clear objective that allows them to win the conflict and return home. Unfortunately the nature of terrorism means that while we follow long held rules that prevent collateral damage, or seek to limit it, the enemy we are fighting do not.

Just as we learned to our sorrow in Vietnam, as the British learned in fighting the IRA, the Russians in fighting the Mujaheddin, and we are learning again in our current battles, terrorists do not feel the need to adhere to the laws of warfare. They use civilians to support them, protect targets, or provide them escape methods. They attack civilians gleefully, knowing we cannot respond in kind.

While I do not support Trump, I do think we seriously need to have a new Geneva Convention to clarify how to treat terrorists and their civilian supporters. I think that is what the ex-Seal meant at the heart of his argument, that fighting terrorists using the old "Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, we have rules here" is an absolute losing proposition. Even Obama found that we needed to work outside the rules sometimes to be successful, hence his invasion into a sovereign allied nation to kill or capture Bin Laden, and his current extremely heavy use of drone attacks on suspected targets.

As far as the second veteran, I feel it is absolutely valid to question his integrity. He could have claimed CO status prior to going to conflict or simply not joined the military in the first place. Instead, he decided to claim it after experiencing combat, something my friends who have served noticed happening in the first gulf war. You really don't want a recap of some of the things they called people who left the service after seeing combat.