Police Officer talks about his experience at Trump's rally in Tucson: AWESOME!

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: yuppa

Actually it does. BOTH sides have to agree on it.

That is untrue. The signatory, regardless of whether or not the other side signed it, is bound to adhere to the policies laid-out in the Geneva Convention.

I went back and researched that. you forgot ANd i also forgot article 3. IF they are captured and under surrender yes they have a few rights but not as many as a actual soldier. SO th esolution is clear. stop capturing them and just dispose of them like the dogs they are. Cant capture a corpse. A simple change of th eROE and take no prisoners will suffice.

I think the bleeding hearts would rather capture them, then give them a nice house and welfare - as long as they voted democrat.

And you consider this an example of a reasonable and logically based comment on the issues?

Your positions are often exceedingly partisan. Further, I am a registered Democrat and your comment is either incorrect, or dishonest, take your pick. No Democrat anywhere at any time has suggested this treason. Could we have an apology from you for making such a crass, uniformed and dishonest comment?

a reply to: yuppa

You are aware that in the eyes of many in the world, it is the United States that is the terrorists. Our tendency to cause "collateral damage" wherever we become involved in the world, one of several reasons for that belief, true or not.

The Conventions were put in place to hopefully diminish the acts of utter inhumanity nation commits against nation.

If our soldiers are captured, you're okay with them being tortured, or, as you so eloquently put it, put down like dogs?

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: yuppa

Anyone who wants to ignore Geneva Convention and international law, wants to put dishonor on our troops and abandon morality. It's disgusting. To put murder and torture and any other unspeakable act on a kid who signed up to defend our country.

No need to worry, the torture can be handled by specialists. Plenty are trained for that in America.
I am sure they will be able to handle their shame with the knowledge they might save countless innocent lives.

The armed forces can get on with the business of executing Trumps excellent strategy for wiping out ISIS.

a reply to: UKTruth

Torture is illegal by international law. You are advocating for war crime.

Trump's "excellent strategy" eh? That has no absolutely no substance, miliary reality, logistical practicality, etc?

The hits just keep coming ...

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: yuppa

Actually it does. BOTH sides have to agree on it.

That is untrue. The signatory, regardless of whether or not the other side signed it, is bound to adhere to the policies laid-out in the Geneva Convention.

I went back and researched that. you forgot ANd i also forgot article 3. IF they are captured and under surrender yes they have a few rights but not as many as a actual soldier. SO th esolution is clear. stop capturing them and just dispose of them like the dogs they are. Cant capture a corpse. A simple change of th eROE and take no prisoners will suffice.

I think the bleeding hearts would rather capture them, then give them a nice house and welfare - as long as they voted democrat.

And you consider this an example of a reasonable and logically based comment on the issues?

Your positions are often exceedingly partisan. Further, I am a registered Democrat and your comment is either incorrect, or dishonest, take your pick. No Democrat anywhere at any time has suggested this treason. Could we have an apology from you for making such a crass, uniformed and dishonest comment?

I suspect the democrats would take anyone so long as it meant one more vote. My opinion is not intended to offend you - only you can control what you are offended about.
I am not changing my opinion. I actually think the disgusting thing is the Democratic party putting innocent lives in danger by pushing for an increase in refugees entering the country despite being told by intelligence services that they can not be screened effectively.

Donald Trump wasted no time in backing torture (again) after this morning's terrorist attacks in Brussels. "Waterboarding would be fine" for Salah Abdeslam, one of the alleged participants in the massacre in Paris last November, Trump said on the Today Show. He's previously said he'd like to do "a hell of a lot worse" than waterboarding to terrorism suspects, and on Tuesday he repeated his call to change the laws to allow further acts of torture: "If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding. You have to get the information from these people."

But terrorism expert Malcolm Nance, the head of the Terrorism Asymmetrics Project and a veteran of Navy intelligence, took Trump to task for doing the propaganda work of ISIS. "Good God, they're probably cutting videos of this right now," Nance said on MSNBC about Trump's comments. "Donald Trump right now is validating the cartoonish view that they tell their operatives…that America is a racist nation, xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and that that's why you must carry out terrorist attacks against them…It's irresponsible and it needs to stop."

Mother Jones - Terrorism Expert: ISIS Is "Probably Cutting Videos" of Donald Trump's Response to Belgium Attacks

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Torture is illegal by international law. You are advocating for war crime.

Trump's "excellent strategy" eh? That has no absolutely no substance, miliary reality, logistical practicality, etc?

The hits just keep coming ...

We've already established that laws will be broken due the nature of the problem. We moved on to trying to get to some alternatives to Trumps excellent and visionary strategy, but so far nothing is forthcoming.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Donald Trump wasted no time in backing torture (again) after this morning's terrorist attacks in Brussels. "Waterboarding would be fine" for Salah Abdeslam, one of the alleged participants in the massacre in Paris last November, Trump said on the Today Show. He's previously said he'd like to do "a hell of a lot worse" than waterboarding to terrorism suspects, and on Tuesday he repeated his call to change the laws to allow further acts of torture: "If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding. You have to get the information from these people."

But terrorism expert Malcolm Nance, the head of the Terrorism Asymmetrics Project and a veteran of Navy intelligence, took Trump to task for doing the propaganda work of ISIS. "Good God, they're probably cutting videos of this right now," Nance said on MSNBC about Trump's comments. "Donald Trump right now is validating the cartoonish view that they tell their operatives…that America is a racist nation, xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and that that's why you must carry out terrorist attacks against them…It's irresponsible and it needs to stop."

Mother Jones - Terrorism Expert: ISIS Is "Probably Cutting Videos" of Donald Trump's Response to Belgium Attacks

Perhaps we should send them a letter of complaint letting them know we'll all be really really unhappy if they don't stop blowing up and shooting people. Or maybe ask for their understanding and letting them know they are interrupting the baseball game.

a reply to: UKTruth

I am not offended; you are lying and making false statements that are deplorable.

Unless you can quote a Democrat, any Democrat, making a statement that they would give comfort and aid to terrorists, when making such a rancidly false statement is not only abominable, but against the rules of our community here, then I'd like to request politely, again, that you retract this false statement.

You have zero proof that lives are being put in danger by advocating for a humanitarian response to refugees; that is an empty supposition. It's pure partisan rhetoric, even though you protest that you are neither right or left in your politics. It's not true, and it's not fair, and there is zero basis in fact for your statement.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Donald Trump wasted no time in backing torture (again) after this morning's terrorist attacks in Brussels. "Waterboarding would be fine" for Salah Abdeslam, one of the alleged participants in the massacre in Paris last November, Trump said on the Today Show. He's previously said he'd like to do "a hell of a lot worse" than waterboarding to terrorism suspects, and on Tuesday he repeated his call to change the laws to allow further acts of torture: "If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding. You have to get the information from these people."

But terrorism expert Malcolm Nance, the head of the Terrorism Asymmetrics Project and a veteran of Navy intelligence, took Trump to task for doing the propaganda work of ISIS. "Good God, they're probably cutting videos of this right now," Nance said on MSNBC about Trump's comments. "Donald Trump right now is validating the cartoonish view that they tell their operatives…that America is a racist nation, xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and that that's why you must carry out terrorist attacks against them…It's irresponsible and it needs to stop."

Mother Jones - Terrorism Expert: ISIS Is "Probably Cutting Videos" of Donald Trump's Response to Belgium Attacks

Perhaps we should send them a letter of complaint letting them know we'll all be really really unhappy if they don't stop blowing up and shooting people. Or maybe ask for their understanding and letting them know they are interrupting the baseball game.

That is utterly foolish hyperbole. No one, least of all the current Democratic Administration, nor any other Democrat is suggesting "sending a letter" to the terrorists. You seem to conveniently forget that ISIS has been the target of more American munitions in the last two years than the firebombing of Dresden.

So "blowing them up" is hardly a valid solution, is it? Since you are pretending that the empty rhetoric you're tossing around here represents "solutions."

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

I am not offended; you are lying and making false statements that are deplorable.

Unless you can quote a Democrat, any Democrat, making a statement that they would give comfort and aid to terrorists, when making such a rancidly false statement is not only abominable, but against the rules of our community here, then I'd like to request politely, again, that you retract this false statement.

You have zero proof that lives are being put in danger by advocating for a humanitarian response to refugees; that is an empty supposition. It's pure partisan rhetoric, even though you protest that you are neither right or left in your politics. It's not true, and it's not fair, and there is zero basis in fact for your statement.

The intelligence services have already said they cant screen effectively.
Tonight a senior intelligence official used the term 'we don't know what we don't know'
Both ISIS and intelligence services have already said that terrorists will infiltrate the flow of refugees.

So, I will hold my view, given the views of the experts and the terrorists themselves and I absolutely hold the parties leading the western nations in contempt for endangering the lives of innocent people.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Donald Trump wasted no time in backing torture (again) after this morning's terrorist attacks in Brussels. "Waterboarding would be fine" for Salah Abdeslam, one of the alleged participants in the massacre in Paris last November, Trump said on the Today Show. He's previously said he'd like to do "a hell of a lot worse" than waterboarding to terrorism suspects, and on Tuesday he repeated his call to change the laws to allow further acts of torture: "If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding. You have to get the information from these people."

But terrorism expert Malcolm Nance, the head of the Terrorism Asymmetrics Project and a veteran of Navy intelligence, took Trump to task for doing the propaganda work of ISIS. "Good God, they're probably cutting videos of this right now," Nance said on MSNBC about Trump's comments. "Donald Trump right now is validating the cartoonish view that they tell their operatives…that America is a racist nation, xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and that that's why you must carry out terrorist attacks against them…It's irresponsible and it needs to stop."

Mother Jones - Terrorism Expert: ISIS Is "Probably Cutting Videos" of Donald Trump's Response to Belgium Attacks

Perhaps we should send them a letter of complaint letting them know we'll all be really really unhappy if they don't stop blowing up and shooting people. Or maybe ask for their understanding and letting them know they are interrupting the baseball game.

That is utterly foolish hyperbole. No one, least of all the current Democratic Administration, nor any other Democrat is suggesting "sending a letter" to the terrorists. You seem to conveniently forget that ISIS has been the target of more American munitions in the last two years than the firebombing of Dresden.

So "blowing them up" is hardly a valid solution, is it? Since you are pretending that the empty rhetoric you're tossing around here represents "solutions."

I am just trying to fill in the blanks of an alternative as all I have heard are attacks on what Trump is proposing (along with the usual insults to those think he is right), but zero in terms of ideas.

Hey, it could be a very very strongly worded letter.

a reply to: UKTruth

Yes, if there were an easy solution to terrorism we would have solved the problem already. However, bloviated nonsense about torture, killing the families of suspected terrorists, and these empty "strategies" with no basis in reality is CERTAINLY not a solution to the problem.

To continually suggest that such nonsense has any validity at all is to basically insult common intelligence.

So, you have no basis, nor backup, nor references to support the lie that Democrats individually or as a group advocate for giving aid and comfort to terrorists ... but you don't have the dignity to realize that such dishonesty overstepped the bounds of even contentious partisan debate here? I don't care if you change your view on anything, but making such libelous statements in public is morally and ethically bankrupt.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Donald Trump wasted no time in backing torture (again) after this morning's terrorist attacks in Brussels. "Waterboarding would be fine" for Salah Abdeslam, one of the alleged participants in the massacre in Paris last November, Trump said on the Today Show. He's previously said he'd like to do "a hell of a lot worse" than waterboarding to terrorism suspects, and on Tuesday he repeated his call to change the laws to allow further acts of torture: "If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding. You have to get the information from these people."

But terrorism expert Malcolm Nance, the head of the Terrorism Asymmetrics Project and a veteran of Navy intelligence, took Trump to task for doing the propaganda work of ISIS. "Good God, they're probably cutting videos of this right now," Nance said on MSNBC about Trump's comments. "Donald Trump right now is validating the cartoonish view that they tell their operatives…that America is a racist nation, xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and that that's why you must carry out terrorist attacks against them…It's irresponsible and it needs to stop."

Mother Jones - Terrorism Expert: ISIS Is "Probably Cutting Videos" of Donald Trump's Response to Belgium Attacks

Perhaps we should send them a letter of complaint letting them know we'll all be really really unhappy if they don't stop blowing up and shooting people. Or maybe ask for their understanding and letting them know they are interrupting the baseball game.

That is utterly foolish hyperbole. No one, least of all the current Democratic Administration, nor any other Democrat is suggesting "sending a letter" to the terrorists. You seem to conveniently forget that ISIS has been the target of more American munitions in the last two years than the firebombing of Dresden.

So "blowing them up" is hardly a valid solution, is it? Since you are pretending that the empty rhetoric you're tossing around here represents "solutions."

I am just trying to fill in the blanks of an alternative as all I have heard are attacks on what Trump is proposing (along with the usual insults to those think he is right), but zero in terms of ideas.

Hey, it could be a very very strongly worded letter.

Your humor considering today's events is entirely misplaced, if I may say so.

You have done nothing here to "fill in the blanks" merely advocated for criminal acts under international law.

Your hero Trump is not offering any solutions, merely more generic, empty, platitudes more worthy of a carnival barker than a Presidential Candidate.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yes, if there were an easy solution to terrorism we would have solved the problem already. However, bloviated nonsense about torture, killing the families of suspected terrorists, and these empty "strategies" with no basis in reality is CERTAINLY not a solution to the problem.

It suggest so is to basically insult intelligence.

So, you have no basis, nor backup, nor references to support the lie that Democrats individually or as a group advocate for giving aid and comfort to terrorists ... but you don't have the dignity to realize that such dishonesty overstepped the bounds of even contentious partisan debate here? I don't care if you change your view on anything, but making such libelous statements in public is morally and ethically bankrupt.

Given the reports that terrorists are amongst the refugees, they actually ARE being given aid already.
Oh good Trump has just won Arizona easily, with nearly 50% of the vote. Hopefully, as President he can sort things out.
Anyway off to bed now, was waiting up for that excellent news.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yes, if there were an easy solution to terrorism we would have solved the problem already. However, bloviated nonsense about torture, killing the families of suspected terrorists, and these empty "strategies" with no basis in reality is CERTAINLY not a solution to the problem.

It suggest so is to basically insult intelligence.

So, you have no basis, nor backup, nor references to support the lie that Democrats individually or as a group advocate for giving aid and comfort to terrorists ... but you don't have the dignity to realize that such dishonesty overstepped the bounds of even contentious partisan debate here? I don't care if you change your view on anything, but making such libelous statements in public is morally and ethically bankrupt.

Given the reports that terrorists are amongst the refugees, they actually ARE being given aid already.
Oh good Trump has just won Arizona easily, with nearly 50% of the vote. Hopefully, as President he can sort things out.

Come on ... "given the reports" ??? Which reports, which refugees, where when? You're acting like your hero Trump, gesticulating wildly at the air.

I know you're "not American" ... but since you seem to you keep up with such amazing details regarding American politics, you might have heard that our top two candidates (Trump and Clinton) are more unpopular with the Electorate at large than any other candidates in history. (CBS/NYT Poll)

If Trump were elected President by some means, it would not be with a plurality of America behind him. About 2/3 of us disapprove of the man and his "policies." Donald Trump Favorable Rating- 116 polls from 20 pollsters - 67% unfavorable

a reply to: Gryphon66

originally posted by: AboveBoard
OOH! Here it is! PEW research. Only...it ISN'T WHAT THE ARTICLE SAID. The article implied that THE AMERICAN PEOPLE across the board were rating President Obama's priorities THE SAME.

THIS IS NOT THE CASE! The article is misleading... (Surprise!!) The accurate title of the PEW data is:

Few Republicans prioritize dealing with gun policy, global climate change

Link to PEW site

That was from another thread, but it shows that most Americans support the issues Trump is the voice of.

Republicans actually only have Trump

Democrats have bernie, but without Bernie, his economic minded votes would go to Trump who has similar views about things like NAFTA and corporate welfare.

Also bernies foreign policy which gets him allot of support would go to Trump if Bernie is out.

That is FAR from 1/3. That is almost everyone not fooled by Hillary.

Also she is going to jail.

a reply to: tadaman

No, it doesn't demonstrate that at all except perhaps to someone who is a Trump True Believer.

Ratings of positions that Trump may or may not share is not the same as the fact that most Americans polled DISAPPROVE of Donald Trump as shown.

a reply to: Gryphon66

He is ahead in most polls.

Didnt those same polls show him behind in states he already has in the bag?

Polling is absurd before an election

Allot of it tries to swing votes by painting a person as losing.

Like what happened to Ron Paul.

He was ahead in most, and the MSM kept polling him as being behind

originally posted by: tadaman

That is FAR from 1/3. That is almost everyone not fooled by Hillary.

Also she is going to jail.

In every poll you care to name, Democrats outnumber Republicans and both are outnumbered by Independents.

Waving your hands at the fact that in an overwhelming number of polls of the American public, Donald Trump has a 66-67% DISAPPROVAL RATING.