Complimenting a 10 year old on their looks and saying she will be attractive as an adult vs bombing Libya into chaos without provocation and arming al Nusra (who execute all captives). Yes, I can see how the first instance is the true evil.
Libya was in a full scale civil war before the bombing. Chaos is an improvement.
We haven’t seen what Trump would do when Commander-and-Chief of the United States Military. The evidence suggests it will be much worse then the likes of Clinton or Bush.
Another version is that Arab Spring seemed a good idea to a lot of people. Some protests began, and then, suddenly, some armed insurgents. France and Britain went into panic mode and insisted NATO do something. Canada was in on it, sending a warship and war planes. The African Union got involved and tried to work a cease fire between government and insurgents. With no problem, and no massacres, the Libyan army moved from town to city east along the coast. Then, just before Benghazi, screams of impending massacre from France and Britain (and Blair wasn’t even Prime Minister). All at once, a report of a Libyan war plane dropping a bomb on civilians in Tripoli. African Union said it had the cease fire ready to go, and that NATO should back off, but NATO attacked.
And, by golly, here there were British ‘diplomats and SAS forces in Benghazi from before the get go. And wouldn’t yu know it, NGO’s and assorted other outsiders in Tripoli said they knew nothing of a Libyan war plane dropping a bomb in Tripoli. (Several journalists resigned from Al Jazeera after that report.)
Then, NATO having destroyed the regime and a whole whack of infrastructure, the chaos reigned.
Oh, and no more talk of a Libyan financed dinar to free African resource industry and trade from Western financials, so the operation was a huge success.
Huge success!
…as was the ‘information ‘ campaign that accompanied it.
Oh Jesus. That whole Libyan financed dinar thing is half-baked conspiratorial idiocy. It’s about as credible and viable as the Freemen on the Land taxation stuff.
Dave lays out the facts well, I just read doconnor’s comment, notice he dismisses 100,000’s dead as cost of doing business and think; yup that’s a progressive.
Any man who still defends Donald Trump needs to turn to their wife/girlfriend/mother/daughter and tell them that they condone sexual harassment and assault. Any man who still defends Bill Clinton needs to turn to their wife/girlfriend/mother/daughter and tell them that they condone sexual harassment, and assault.
Not at all. Where do you see me implying that. I am implying, however, that there are a lot of “progressive” hypocrites who defended a man who exposed himself to women, had inappropriate sexual conduct with an intern at work and worked to publicly discredit her, and was accused of forcible rape by more than one women. Donald Trump is a misogynist asshole, but so are all you lefties that turn the other way when it’s one of your own.
Trump’s reaction to these allegations is what’s most telling and most predictive of his behaviour as a president–scorched earth, which sounds a lot like the nuclear option to me.
I would like to meet someone who scorned Cosby and Ghomeshi, yet supports Trump. If such a person exists, I would like them to explain their utter hypocrisy.
Next Drumpf rally song. Trouble on my mind
Trouble on my mind
I got trouble on my mind
Trouble on my mind
So much trouble on my mind
~Pusha T
He still doesn’t know you exist.
And ?
Blatant pile on of convenience. Media had this info, and it won’t be followed up after he loses. USA is a shameful country.
Complimenting a 10 year old on their looks and saying she will be attractive as an adult vs bombing Libya into chaos without provocation and arming al Nusra (who execute all captives). Yes, I can see how the first instance is the true evil.
SMH what corrupt days these be.
Libya was in a full scale civil war before the bombing. Chaos is an improvement.
We haven’t seen what Trump would do when Commander-and-Chief of the United States Military. The evidence suggests it will be much worse then the likes of Clinton or Bush.
Another version is that Arab Spring seemed a good idea to a lot of people. Some protests began, and then, suddenly, some armed insurgents. France and Britain went into panic mode and insisted NATO do something. Canada was in on it, sending a warship and war planes. The African Union got involved and tried to work a cease fire between government and insurgents. With no problem, and no massacres, the Libyan army moved from town to city east along the coast. Then, just before Benghazi, screams of impending massacre from France and Britain (and Blair wasn’t even Prime Minister). All at once, a report of a Libyan war plane dropping a bomb on civilians in Tripoli. African Union said it had the cease fire ready to go, and that NATO should back off, but NATO attacked.
And, by golly, here there were British ‘diplomats and SAS forces in Benghazi from before the get go. And wouldn’t yu know it, NGO’s and assorted other outsiders in Tripoli said they knew nothing of a Libyan war plane dropping a bomb in Tripoli. (Several journalists resigned from Al Jazeera after that report.)
Then, NATO having destroyed the regime and a whole whack of infrastructure, the chaos reigned.
Oh, and no more talk of a Libyan financed dinar to free African resource industry and trade from Western financials, so the operation was a huge success.
Huge success!
…as was the ‘information ‘ campaign that accompanied it.
Oh Jesus. That whole Libyan financed dinar thing is half-baked conspiratorial idiocy. It’s about as credible and viable as the Freemen on the Land taxation stuff.
Dave lays out the facts well, I just read doconnor’s comment, notice he dismisses 100,000’s dead as cost of doing business and think; yup that’s a progressive.
Do you have a source? Wikipedia has the number of kill by the Western bombing was less the 100. The total was 25,000 at most.
I wonder if the hundreads of thousands killed in Syria due to not enough Western intervention is progressive, too?
Oh, only 25,000? My bad, that’s nothing. As you were.
Any man who still defends Donald Trump needs to turn to their wife/girlfriend/mother/daughter and tell them that they condone sexual harassment and assault. Any man who still defends Bill Clinton needs to turn to their wife/girlfriend/mother/daughter and tell them that they condone sexual harassment, and assault.
Yep. And by your logic, Hillary needs to turn to Americans and explain that she condones sexual harassment, and assault.
Not at all. Where do you see me implying that. I am implying, however, that there are a lot of “progressive” hypocrites who defended a man who exposed himself to women, had inappropriate sexual conduct with an intern at work and worked to publicly discredit her, and was accused of forcible rape by more than one women. Donald Trump is a misogynist asshole, but so are all you lefties that turn the other way when it’s one of your own.
Trump’s reaction to these allegations is what’s most telling and most predictive of his behaviour as a president–scorched earth, which sounds a lot like the nuclear option to me.
I would like to meet someone who scorned Cosby and Ghomeshi, yet supports Trump. If such a person exists, I would like them to explain their utter hypocrisy.
Why isn’t he being charged with sexual assault?
Why aren’t these women asking the police to charge him with sexual assault?